Attention is currently required from: neels, laforge, pespin, fixeria.
8 comments:
File src/sccp_scoc.c:
Patch Set #15, Line 642: /* optional: importance */
why is this line removed here? this is non related.
The RLC does not have optional importance field.
Ack
We shouldn't. Shall I replace it with assert or just drop?
Patch Set #15, Line 606: } else
remove curly braces in the if.
Actually it's better to add them to else according to https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/latest/process/coding-style.html#placing-braces-and-spaces
Patch Set #15, Line 630: if (xua_drop_data_check(prim, SCCP_MAX_DATA, "cache overrun"))
... […]
Done
Patch Set #15, Line 635: LOGP(DLSCCP, LOGL_ERROR, "replacing unsent %u bytes of optional data cache with %s optional data\n",
NOTICE
I think it's error - this situation should not arise normally.
Patch Set #15, Line 639: msgb_alloc(SCCP_MAX_DATA, "SCCP optional data cache for CR/CC/RLSD");
Ack
Done
Patch Set #15, Line 639: msgb_alloc(SCCP_MAX_DATA, "SCCP optional data cache for CR/CC/RLSD");
Ack
Done
Patch Set #15, Line 784: xua_msg_add_sccp_addr(xua, SUA_IEI_DEST_ADDR, &conn->calling_addr);
why is this line removed here? this is non related.
Similar to the above: the comments are placed to match the fields order in the spec.
To view, visit change 29084. To unsubscribe, or for help writing mail filters, visit settings.