Attention is currently required from: neels, laforge, fixeria, lynxis lazus. pespin has posted comments on this change. ( https://gerrit.osmocom.org/c/osmo-bsc/+/29788 ) Change subject: Add BTS setup ramping to prevent BSC overloading ...................................................................... Patch Set 16: (7 comments) Patchset: PS16: I don't get why did you move the stuff to allstate again despite I explicitly told you not to do that. what's going on here? what's the rationale behind that? can you explain the problem in detail? File include/osmocom/bsc/nm_common_fsm.h: https://gerrit.osmocom.org/c/osmo-bsc/+/29788/comment/35d21f2e_cea5a2b5 PS16, Line 41: NM_EV_RAMP_GO, /* BTS ramp allow to continue to configure */ "RAMP" is too generic here, maybe "NM_EV_SETUP_RAMO_GO". File src/osmo-bsc/bsc_vty.c: https://gerrit.osmocom.org/c/osmo-bsc/+/29788/comment/2c93ced3_1906a31c PS4, Line 3100: bts-setup-ramping-step-interval I'm fine with current proposal. Oteherwise you end up with a command "bts-setup-ramping" and a command starting with the same, which is confusing. One could use "bts-setup-ramping enable (0|1)" too, but I don't see it's really needed. As pointed out we already have similar stuff with access-control-class-ramping. File src/osmo-bsc/bsc_vty.c: https://gerrit.osmocom.org/c/osmo-bsc/+/29788/comment/65291110_a7d2345c PS16, Line 3131: DEFUN_ATTR(cfg_bsc_no_bts_setup_ramping, I'd move this one immediately below the "bts-setup-ramping" one, since it's its counterpart. https://gerrit.osmocom.org/c/osmo-bsc/+/29788/comment/7f9d75f9_378a91a7 PS16, Line 3609: install_element(BSC_NODE, &cfg_bsc_bts_setup_ramping_cmd); See. here you put the 2 commands together (correct). File src/osmo-bsc/bts_setup_ramp.c: https://gerrit.osmocom.org/c/osmo-bsc/+/29788/comment/55432c7d_b388ebc6 PS16, Line 86: { BTS_SETUP_RAMP_GO, "Go" }, (I find the "go" state a bit weird tbh, "Ready" would fit more imho). File src/osmo-bsc/nm_bb_transc_fsm.c: https://gerrit.osmocom.org/c/osmo-bsc/+/29788/comment/3644716b_5c4660df PS16, Line 347: case NM_BB_TRANSC_ST_OP_DISABLED_DEPENDENCY: I'm still not getting why you keep putting this in the allstate. Put it in the relevant states like all the other stuff calling the configure_loop(). AFAIU this event can only come while the BTS is being configured. -- To view, visit https://gerrit.osmocom.org/c/osmo-bsc/+/29788 To unsubscribe, or for help writing mail filters, visit https://gerrit.osmocom.org/settings Gerrit-Project: osmo-bsc Gerrit-Branch: master Gerrit-Change-Id: Id56dde6d58f3d0d20352f6c306598d2cccc6345d Gerrit-Change-Number: 29788 Gerrit-PatchSet: 16 Gerrit-Owner: lynxis lazus <lynxis(a)fe80.eu> Gerrit-Reviewer: Jenkins Builder Gerrit-Reviewer: fixeria <vyanitskiy(a)sysmocom.de> Gerrit-Reviewer: pespin <pespin(a)sysmocom.de> Gerrit-CC: laforge <laforge(a)osmocom.org> Gerrit-CC: neels <nhofmeyr(a)sysmocom.de> Gerrit-Attention: neels <nhofmeyr(a)sysmocom.de> Gerrit-Attention: laforge <laforge(a)osmocom.org> Gerrit-Attention: fixeria <vyanitskiy(a)sysmocom.de> Gerrit-Attention: lynxis lazus <lynxis(a)fe80.eu> Gerrit-Comment-Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2022 10:06:08 +0000 Gerrit-HasComments: Yes Gerrit-Has-Labels: No Comment-In-Reply-To: fixeria <vyanitskiy(a)sysmocom.de> Comment-In-Reply-To: lynxis lazus <lynxis(a)fe80.eu> Gerrit-MessageType: comment