Attention is currently required from: dexter, fixeria, pespin.
laforge has posted comments on this change. (
https://gerrit.osmocom.org/c/osmo-hnbgw/+/36311?usp=email )
Change subject: RAB activation/modification/release statistics
......................................................................
Patch Set 2:
(4 comments)
File include/osmocom/hnbgw/context_map.h:
https://gerrit.osmocom.org/c/osmo-hnbgw/+/36311/comment/9bdce008_47b77613
PS2, Line 5: osmocom/core/bitvec.h
Why do we need this import in a header file? Looks
unrelated and unneeded.
thanks. it's anrtifact of an earlier version of the
patch, where I used a bit-mask of RABs - however, this turned out to be insufficient as
we'd need at least two bits per RAB.
https://gerrit.osmocom.org/c/osmo-hnbgw/+/36311/comment/a6321af0_89528da6
PS2, Line 173: uint8_t rab_state[256];
This is something we most probably want to have as
some sort of bitmask in the future, eg using 2 bi […]
it actually was a bitmask with
one bit in the beginning, but then I had to move to away from that. Using an array is
simple and works. In the end, even at e.g. 10000 UE, this is only 2.5 Megabytes of RAM.
Nothing to worry about.
What would make more sense is to unify this information with the ps_rabs list and the
mgw_fsm further above. So that basically there's one object for per-RAB information
and not multiple.
File src/osmo-hnbgw/kpi_ranap.c:
https://gerrit.osmocom.org/c/osmo-hnbgw/+/36311/comment/6f3aba76_4153dde6
PS2, Line 54: ranap_message *ranap
`const` like above?
I had that originally, but
it sadly doesn't work. I don't recall where it failed, but I think some of the
osmo-iuh generated code doesn't permit passing a const structure [even when it
should].
https://gerrit.osmocom.org/c/osmo-hnbgw/+/36311/comment/5c782278_f640df6a
PS2, Line 362: //kpi_ranap_process_dl_iu_rel_cmpl(map, ranap); /* IU RELEASE COMPLETE
(8.5) */
why is this one commented out?
I think I
originally thought we'd need to track something here, but then didn't need it
after all. Looking at the specs again, it looks like there's a list of released RABs
in this message, so we might use that instead of simply assuming all RABs are releaed in
the IU RELEASE COMMAND. I'll add a comment to say that.
--
To view, visit
https://gerrit.osmocom.org/c/osmo-hnbgw/+/36311?usp=email
To unsubscribe, or for help writing mail filters, visit
https://gerrit.osmocom.org/settings
Gerrit-Project: osmo-hnbgw
Gerrit-Branch: master
Gerrit-Change-Id: I198fa37699e22380909764de6a0522ac79aa1d39
Gerrit-Change-Number: 36311
Gerrit-PatchSet: 2
Gerrit-Owner: laforge <laforge(a)osmocom.org>
Gerrit-Reviewer: Jenkins Builder
Gerrit-Reviewer: dexter <pmaier(a)sysmocom.de>
Gerrit-Reviewer: pespin <pespin(a)sysmocom.de>
Gerrit-CC: fixeria <vyanitskiy(a)sysmocom.de>
Gerrit-Attention: fixeria <vyanitskiy(a)sysmocom.de>
Gerrit-Attention: pespin <pespin(a)sysmocom.de>
Gerrit-Attention: dexter <pmaier(a)sysmocom.de>
Gerrit-Comment-Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2024 12:51:56 +0000
Gerrit-HasComments: Yes
Gerrit-Has-Labels: No
Comment-In-Reply-To: fixeria <vyanitskiy(a)sysmocom.de>
Comment-In-Reply-To: pespin <pespin(a)sysmocom.de>
Gerrit-MessageType: comment