OpenBSC January 2016

openbsc@lists.osmocom.org

11 participants
43 discussions

by OMAR RAMADAN

I'm using LCR as a GSM <-> SIP interface and I've been trying to figure out why MO calls result in a segfault. I am running openbsc on cdc548cb and LCR on c14326641a built and run on an ubuntu 14.04 64bit. >From what I've investigated so far, the request_uri passed to sofia-sip is malformed. Has anyone seen this problem before? Would appreciate pointers. Here are the full logs and stack trace: ** LCR Version 1.14 > 000000 DEBUG (in route.c/getrulesetbyname() line 1928): ruleset main found. > 000000 DEBUG (in sip.cpp/sip_init() line 1997): SIP globals initialized > 000000 DEBUG (in gsm.cpp/mncc_socket_retry_cb() line 1443): Connected to > MNCC socket /tmp/bsc_mncc! > su_port_create(0x6ad410): epoll_create() => 0: OK > su_socket_port_init(0x6ad410, 0x7ffff7dcf880) called > su_pthread_port_init(0x6ad410, 0x7ffff7dcf880) called > nua: nua_create: entering > [New Thread 0x7ffff6c52700 (LWP 11520)] > su_port_create(0x7ffff00008c0): epoll_create() => 0: OK > su_socket_port_init(0x7ffff00008c0, 0x7ffff7dcf880) called > su_pthread_port_init(0x7ffff00008c0, 0x7ffff7dcf880) called > nua: nua_stack_init: entering > nua: nua_stack_set_params: entering > soa_create("default", 0x7ffff0001130, 0x7ffff0001230) called > soa_set_params(static::0x7ffff0001920, ...) called > soa_set_params(static::0x7ffff0001920, ...) called > nta_agent_create: initialized hash tables > nta_agent_create: initialized transports > nta_agent_create: initialized random identifiers > nta_agent_create: initialized timer > nta_agent_create: initialized resolver > tport_create(): 0x7ffff0003df0 > nta: master transport created > tport_bind_server(0x7ffff0003df0) to */127.0.0.1:5062/sip > tport_bind_server(0x7ffff0003df0): calling tport_listen for udp > tport_alloc_primary(0x7ffff0003df0): new primary tport 0x7ffff0004470 > tport_listen(0x7ffff0004470): listening at udp/127.0.0.1:5062/sip > tport_bind_server(0x7ffff0003df0): calling tport_listen for tcp > tport_alloc_primary(0x7ffff0003df0): new primary tport 0x7ffff0004910 > tport_listen(0x7ffff0004910): listening at tcp/127.0.0.1:5062/sip > nta: bound to (127.0.0.1:5062;transport=*) > nta: agent_init_via: SIP/2.0/udp 127.0.0.1:5062 (sip) > nta: agent_init_via: SIP/2.0/tcp 127.0.0.1:5062 (sip) > nta: Via fields initialized > nta: Contact header created > nua_register: Adding contact URL '127.0.0.1' to list. > nua: nua_set_params: entering > nua((nil)): sent signal r_set_params > 000000 DEBUG (in sip.cpp/sip_init_inst() line 1942): SIP interface created > (inst=0x6acce0) > nua((nil)): recv signal r_set_params > nua: nua_stack_set_params: entering > soa_set_params(static::0x7ffff0001920, ...) called > nua((nil)): event r_set_params 200 OK > LCR 1.14 started, waiting for calls... > 000000 TRACE 15.01.16 11:36:21.011 --: LCR 1.14 started, waiting for > calls... > nua: nua_application_event: entering > 000000 DEBUG (in sip.cpp/sip_callback() line 1785): Event 23 from stack > received (handle=(nil)) > 000000 DEBUG (in port.cpp/Port() line 210): new port (1) of type 0x3101, > name 'gsm-0-in' interface 'gsm' > 000000 DEBUG (in gsm.cpp/Pgsm() line 239): Created new GSMPort(gsm-0-in). > 000000 DEBUG (in gsm_bs.cpp/Pgsm_bs() line 56): Created new > GSMBSPort(gsm-0-in). > 000000 TRACE 15.01.16 11:37:28.210 CH(1): New call ref LCR<->BSC callref > new=0x8000000d > 000000 TRACE 15.01.16 11:37:28.210 CH(1): Codec negotiation LCR<->BSC > bearer capa='given by MS' speech version='Full Rate given' > 000000 TRACE 15.01.16 11:37:28.210 CH(1): MNCC_SETUP_IND LCR<->BSC > calling number=639360100037 imsi=901550000000824 dialing number=12345678 > 000000 DEBUG (in endpoint.cpp/Endpoint() line 48): EPOINT(1): Allocating > enpoint 1 and connecting it with: ioport > 000000 DEBUG (in endpoint.cpp/portlist_new() line 150): EPOINT(1) > allocating port_list, attaching to port 1 > 000000 DEBUG (in appbridge.cpp/EndpointAppBridge() line 31): Bridge > endpoint created > 000000 DEBUG (in port.cpp/epointlist_new() line 131): PORT(1) allocating > epoint_list. > 000000 TRACE 15.01.16 11:37:28.211 CH(1): MNCC_CALL_PROC_REQ LCR<->BSC > progress coding=3 location=1 descr=8 > 000000 DEBUG (in port.cpp/new_state() line 283): PORT(gsm-0-in) new state > PORT_STATE_IDLE --> PORT_STATE_IN_PROCEEDING > 000000 TRACE 15.01.16 11:37:28.211 CH(1): MNCC_FRAME_RECV LCR<->BSC > 000000 DEBUG (in gsm_bs.cpp/setup_ind() line 631): Request RTP peer info, > before forwarding setup > 000000 DEBUG (in gsm.cpp/rtp_create_ind() line 869): Got RTP peer info > (7f000001,52103) forwarding setup > 000000 DEBUG (in message.c/_message_put() line 70): message MESSAGE_SETUP > written from 140733193388033 to 140733193388033 (memory 6b1a50 at file > gsm.cpp, line 872) > 000000 DEBUG (in message.c/message_get() line 115): message MESSAGE_SETUP > reading from 1 to 140733193388033 (memory 6b1a50) > 000000 DEBUG (in appbridge.cpp/port_setup() line 94): EPOINT(1) epoint > received setup from='639360100037' to='12345678' > 000000 DEBUG (in port.cpp/Port() line 210): new port (2) of type 0x2002, > name 'sip-0-out' interface 'sip' > 000000 DEBUG (in sip.cpp/Psip() line 72): Created new Psip(sip-0-out). > 000000 DEBUG (in endpoint.cpp/portlist_new() line 150): EPOINT(1) > allocating port_list, attaching to port 2 > 000000 DEBUG (in message.c/_message_put() line 70): message MESSAGE_SETUP > written from 1 to 2 (memory 6b1a50 at file message.c, line 94) > 000000 DEBUG (in message.c/_message_put() line 70): message MESSAGE_BRIDGE > written from 1 to 1 (memory 6b6c00 at file appbridge.cpp, line 222) > 000000 DEBUG (in message.c/_message_put() line 70): message MESSAGE_BRIDGE > written from 1 to 2 (memory 6ba6e0 at file appbridge.cpp, line 225) > 000000 DEBUG (in message.c/message_get() line 115): message MESSAGE_SETUP > reading from 140733193388033 to 2 (memory 6b1a50) > 000000 DEBUG (in sip.cpp/message_setup() line 954): Doing Setup (inst > 0x6acce0) > 000000 DEBUG (in sip.cpp/message_setup() line 961): RTP info given by > remote, forward that > 000000 DEBUG (in sip.cpp/message_setup() line 968): local ip 7f000001 port > 52103 > 000000 DEBUG (in sip.cpp/message_setup() line 969): remote ip 00000000 > port 0 > nua: nh_create_handle: entering > 000000 TRACE 15.01.16 11:37:28.816 CH(2): NEW handle handle new=0x6b09c0 > 000000 DEBUG (in sip.cpp/message_setup() line 1038): Using SDP for invite: > v=0 > o=LCR-Sofia-SIP 0 0 IN IP4 127.0.0.1 > s=SIP Call > c=IN IP4 127.0.0.1 > t=0 0 > m=audio 52103 RTP/AVP 3 > a=rtpmap:3 GSM/8000 > 000000 TRACE 15.01.16 11:37:28.816 CH(2): INVITE from uri= > sip:639360100037@127.0.0.1:5062 to uri=sip:12345678@192.168.40.100:5060 > rtp ip=127.0.0.1 port=52103,52104 payload=GSM:3 > nua: nua_invite: entering > nua(0x6b09c0): sent signal r_invite > 000000 DEBUG (in port.cpp/new_state() line 283): PORT(sip-0-out) new state > PORT_STATE_IDLE --> PORT_STATE_OUT_SETUP > 000000 DEBUG (in sip.cpp/message_setup() line 1069): do proceeding > 000000 DEBUG (in port.cpp/new_state() line 283): PORT(sip-0-out) new state > PORT_STATE_OUT_SETUP --> PORT_STATE_OUT_PROCEEDING > 000000 DEBUG (in message.c/_message_put() line 70): message > MESSAGE_PROCEEDING written from 2 to 1 (memory 6be1c0 at file sip.cpp, line > 1072) > 000000 DEBUG (in port.cpp/epointlist_new() line 131): PORT(2) allocating > epoint_list. > 000000 DEBUG (in message.c/message_get() line 115): message MESSAGE_BRIDGE > reading from 1 to 1 (memory 6b6c00) > 000000 DEBUG (in port.cpp/message_epoint() line 657): PORT(gsm-0-in) > bridging to id 1 > nua(0x6b09c0): recv signal r_invite > 000000 DEBUG (in port.cpp/bridge() line 1305): Port 1 creating not > existing bridge 1. > 000000 DEBUG (in message.c/message_get() line 115): message MESSAGE_BRIDGE > reading from 1 to 2 (memory 6ba6e0) > 000000 DEBUG (in port.cpp/message_epoint() line 657): PORT(sip-0-out) > bridging to id 1 > nua: nua_stack_set_params: entering > 000000 DEBUG (in port.cpp/bridge() line 1290): Port 2 found existing > bridge 1. > 000000 DEBUG (in message.c/message_get() line 115): message > MESSAGE_PROCEEDING reading from 2 to 1 (memory 6be1c0) > 000000 DEBUG (in appbridge.cpp/port_other() line 259): EPOINT(8) epoint > received message 7070144 from port > 000000 DEBUG (in message.c/_message_put() line 70): message > MESSAGE_PROCEEDING written from 1 to 140733193388033 (memory 6be1c0 at file > message.c, line 94) > 000000 DEBUG (in message.c/message_get() line 115): message > MESSAGE_PROCEEDING reading from 1 to 1 (memory 6be1c0) > nua(0x6b09c0): adding session usage > nta_leg_tcreate(0x7ffff0006b00) > Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault. > [Switching to Thread 0x7ffff6c52700 (LWP 11520)] > strlen () at ../sysdeps/x86_64/strlen.S:106 > 106 ../sysdeps/x86_64/strlen.S: No such file or directory. > (gdb) bt > #0 strlen () at ../sysdeps/x86_64/strlen.S:106 > #1 0x00007ffff7b70896 in url_xtra (url=url@entry=0x7ffff00075d0) at > url.c:1048 > #2 0x00007ffff7b2deaf in sip_request_create (home=home@entry=0x7ffff0006fc0, > method=method@entry=sip_method_invite, name=0x7ffff7b916e2 > <sip_method_name_invite> "INVITE", > name@entry=0x7ffff7b8ed49 "INVITE", uri=uri@entry=0x7ffff00075d0, > version=version@entry=0x0) at sip_basic.c:225 > #3 0x00007ffff7ae3512 in nta_msg_request_complete (msg=msg@entry=0x7ffff0006fc0, > leg=leg@entry=0x7ffff0006b00, method=method@entry=sip_method_invite, > method_name=method_name@entry=0x7ffff7b8ed49 "INVITE", > request_uri=0x7ffff00075d0, request_uri@entry=0x0) at nta.c:3890 > #4 0x00007ffff7b07d92 in nua_client_request_sendmsg (cr=cr@entry=0x7ffff0005af0) > at nua_client.c:803 > #5 0x00007ffff7b08de9 in nua_client_request_try (cr=0x7ffff0005af0) at > nua_client.c:708 > #6 0x00007ffff7b06b93 in nua_client_init_request0 (cr=0x7ffff0005af0) at > nua_client.c:605 > #7 nua_client_init_request (cr=0x7ffff0005af0) at nua_client.c:442 > #8 0x00007ffff7b07246 in nua_client_create (nh=nh@entry=0x6b09c0, > event=event@entry=31, methods=methods@entry=0x7ffff7dc4d20 > <nua_invite_client_methods>, tags=tags@entry=0x6b0eb0) > at nua_client.c:199 > #9 0x00007ffff7b1cc61 in nua_stack_invite (nua=nua@entry=0x6adc80, > nh=nh@entry=0x6b09c0, e=e@entry=nua_r_invite, tags=tags@entry=0x6b0eb0) > at nua_session.c:705 > #10 0x00007ffff7b03eb3 in nua_stack_signal (nua=0x6adc80, msg=<optimized > out>, ee=0x6b0e88) at nua_stack.c:582 > #11 0x00007ffff7b522b2 in su_base_port_execute_msgs (queue=0x0) at > su_base_port.c:280 > #12 0x00007ffff7b527bd in su_base_port_run (self=0x7ffff00008c0) at > su_base_port.c:335 > #13 0x00007ffff7b52f10 in su_pthread_port_clone_main (varg=0x7fffffffe4c0) > at su_pthread_port.c:324 > #14 0x00007ffff7840182 in start_thread (arg=0x7ffff6c52700) at > pthread_create.c:312 > #15 0x00007ffff6d4d47d in clone () at > ../sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/x86_64/clone.S:111 > >

9 years, 4 months

[PATCH 1/4] Improve code style and readability

by suraev＠alumni.ntnu.no

From: Max <msuraev(a)sysmocom.de> --- src/bitvec.c | 12 +++++------- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/bitvec.c b/src/bitvec.c index f9341b7..7254674 100644 --- a/src/bitvec.c +++ b/src/bitvec.c @@ -383,14 +383,12 @@ unsigned int bitvec_unpack(struct bitvec *bv, const uint8_t *buffer) int bitvec_unhex(struct bitvec *bv, const char *src) { - unsigned val; - unsigned write_index = 0; - unsigned digits = bv->data_len * 2; - for (unsigned i = 0; i < digits; i++) { - if (sscanf(src + i, "%1x", &val) < 1) { + unsigned val, i, write_index = 0; + for (i = 0; i < bv->data_len * 2; i++) { + if (sscanf(src + i, "%1x", &val) < 1) return 1; - } - bitvec_write_field(bv, write_index,val, 4); + + bitvec_write_field(bv, write_index, val, 4); } return 0; } -- 2.5.0

9 years, 5 months

IuPS and IuCS branches

by Neels Hofmeyr

Hey Daniel, we are working on our separate branches in openbsc: daniel/gprs-iu and neels/cscn. Merging them will be nontrivial, at least because I have moved gprs/sgsn_iu.c to new libiu/iu.c and include/.../iu.h. That's because some of the stuff there is useful outside of the gprs scope. Otherwise I've not changed the code much, you have at least a little, so before we potentially further complicate the changes, we may benefit from consolidating our branches, sooner rather than later... Though my cscn code doesn't do anything useful yet, it is in a separate new subdir, so merging it to master wouldn't break anything. Merging both our stuffs to master is what I would suggest. If you merge to master first I volunteer to rebase mine and take on the hard half of the merge myself. OTOH, if I'm faster ... ;) (More precisely, I'll bump this in at most two weeks, so plz go for it.) Opinions/strategies welcome! ~Neels -- - Neels Hofmeyr <nhofmeyr(a)sysmocom.de> http://www.sysmocom.de/ ======================================================================= * sysmocom - systems for mobile communications GmbH * Alt-Moabit 93 * 10559 Berlin, Germany * Sitz / Registered office: Berlin, HRB 134158 B * Geschäftsführer / Managing Directors: Holger Freyther, Harald Welte

9 years, 5 months

[PATCH] Fix error introduced in a15f05f1b43d8e85d9a3f72a0a

by suraev＠alumni.ntnu.no

From: Max <msuraev(a)sysmocom.de> Fix error creeped in while porting code from cpp refs. Add test case for code in question. Expand documentatin to clarify function use. --- src/bitvec.c | 24 +++++++++++++++++++----- tests/bitvec/bitvec_test.c | 15 +++++++++++++++ tests/bitvec/bitvec_test.ok | 12 ++++++++++++ 3 files changed, 46 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/bitvec.c b/src/bitvec.c index f9341b7..b88afa6 100644 --- a/src/bitvec.c +++ b/src/bitvec.c @@ -138,6 +138,7 @@ unsigned int bitvec_get_nth_set_bit(const struct bitvec *bv, unsigned int n) * \param[in] bv bit vector on which to operate * \param[in] bitnr number of bit to be set * \param[in] bit value to which the bit is to be set + * \returns 0 on success, negative value on error */ int bitvec_set_bit_pos(struct bitvec *bv, unsigned int bitnr, enum bit_value bit) @@ -163,6 +164,7 @@ int bitvec_set_bit_pos(struct bitvec *bv, unsigned int bitnr, /*! \brief set the next bit inside a bitvec * \param[in] bv bit vector to be used * \param[in] bit value of the bit to be set + * \returns 0 on success, negative value on error */ int bitvec_set_bit(struct bitvec *bv, enum bit_value bit) { @@ -390,11 +392,18 @@ int bitvec_unhex(struct bitvec *bv, const char *src) if (sscanf(src + i, "%1x", &val) < 1) { return 1; } - bitvec_write_field(bv, write_index,val, 4); + bitvec_write_field(bv, write_index, val, 4); + write_index += 4; } return 0; } +/*! \brief read part of the vector + * \param[in] bv The boolean vector to work on + * \param[in] read_index Where reading supposed to start in the vector + * \param[in] len How many bits to read from vector + * \returns read bits or negative value on error + */ uint64_t bitvec_read_field(struct bitvec *bv, unsigned int read_index, unsigned int len) { unsigned int i; @@ -409,11 +418,16 @@ uint64_t bitvec_read_field(struct bitvec *bv, unsigned int read_index, unsigned ui |= ((uint64_t)1 << (len - i - 1)); bv->cur_bit++; } - read_index += len; + return ui; } - +/*! \brief write into the vector + * \param[in] bv The boolean vector to work on + * \param[in] write_index Where writing supposed to start in the vector + * \param[in] len How many bits to write + * \returns next write index or negative value on error + */ int bitvec_write_field(struct bitvec *bv, unsigned int write_index, uint64_t val, unsigned int len) { unsigned int i; @@ -427,8 +441,8 @@ int bitvec_write_field(struct bitvec *bv, unsigned int write_index, uint64_t val if (rc) return rc; } - write_index += len; - return 0; + + return write_index + len; } /*! @} */ diff --git a/tests/bitvec/bitvec_test.c b/tests/bitvec/bitvec_test.c index 624e334..dde8448 100644 --- a/tests/bitvec/bitvec_test.c +++ b/tests/bitvec/bitvec_test.c @@ -55,8 +55,23 @@ static void test_byte_ops() printf("=== end %s ===\n", __func__); } +static void test_unhex(char *hex) +{ + struct bitvec b; + uint8_t d[64] = {0}; + b.data = d; + b.data_len = sizeof(d); + b.cur_bit = 0; + printf("%d -=>\n", bitvec_unhex(&b, hex)); + printf("%s\n%s\n", osmo_hexdump_nospc(d, 64), osmo_hexdump_nospc(hex, 23)); +} + int main(int argc, char **argv) { test_byte_ops(); + test_unhex("48282407a6a074227201000b2b2b2b2b2b2b2b2b2b2b2b"); + test_unhex("47240c00400000000000000079eb2ac9402b2b2b2b2b2b"); + test_unhex("47283c367513ba333004242b2b2b2b2b2b2b2b2b2b2b2b"); + test_unhex("DEADFACE000000000000000000000000000000BEEFFEED"); return 0; } diff --git a/tests/bitvec/bitvec_test.ok b/tests/bitvec/bitvec_test.ok index 1f329af..17e8fd2 100644 --- a/tests/bitvec/bitvec_test.ok +++ b/tests/bitvec/bitvec_test.ok @@ -1,2 +1,14 @@ === start test_byte_ops === === end test_byte_ops === +1 -=> +48282407a6a074227201000b2b2b2b2b2b2b2b2b2b2b2b0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 +48282407a6a074227201000b2b2b2b2b2b2b2b2b2b2b2b0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 +1 -=> +47240c00400000000000000079eb2ac9402b2b2b2b2b2b0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 +47240c00400000000000000079eb2ac9402b2b2b2b2b2b0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 +1 -=> +47283c367513ba333004242b2b2b2b2b2b2b2b2b2b2b2b0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 +47283c367513ba333004242b2b2b2b2b2b2b2b2b2b2b2b0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 +1 -=> +deadface000000000000000000000000000000beeffeed0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 +deadface000000000000000000000000000000beeffeed0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 -- 2.5.0

9 years, 5 months

Status Report on Osmocom's 3G Support

by Neels Hofmeyr

Hi list, it's time for a summary of our progress in the 3G realm. Just this minute, I have posted a blog entry that describes our aim as well as the current development status in abundant detail. At your convenience, see for yourself and visit: https://openbsc.osmocom.org/trac/blog/3G_2016_01 Happy hacking! ~Neels -- - Neels Hofmeyr <nhofmeyr(a)sysmocom.de> http://www.sysmocom.de/ ======================================================================= * sysmocom - systems for mobile communications GmbH * Alt-Moabit 93 * 10559 Berlin, Germany * Sitz / Registered office: Berlin, HRB 134158 B * Geschäftsführer / Managing Directors: Holger Freyther, Harald Welte

9 years, 5 months

const question

by Neels Hofmeyr

Hi, my attention was directed at the gprs_shift_v_fixed() function: int gprs_shift_v_fixed(uint8_t **data, size_t *data_len, size_t len, uint8_t **value) It advances the *data pointer and returns a *value pointer. So it could technically be consting much more aggressively. However, the compiler warnings confuse me. I've created this test code to illustrate; the ints should be treated read-only by func(): void func(const int **yyy) { (*yyy) ++; } int main(void) { int y[2] = {23, 42}; // mutable "by coincidence" int *yy = y; func(&yy); return *yy; // returns 42 } The idea is that yy is a pointer to a mutable int. func() expects a const int, but what harm could be done by passing a mutable-int pointer as an immutable-int pointer. Apparently this harm: check.c: In function ‘main’: check.c:10:14: warning: passing argument 1 of ‘func’ from incompatible pointer type func(&yy); ^ check.c:1:6: note: expected ‘const int **’ but argument is of type ‘int **’ void func(const int **yyy) Changing yy to a pointer-to-const-int clears the warning: const int *yy = y; func(&yy); I'm expecting the const to apply to the int pointed at, so I should be able to modify the pointer while the compiler shouldn't waste a thought at whether the int pointed at is const or not. func() is stricter, not less strict than y[]. To further illustrate, this would make the pointer address itself immutable, which is not what I want: int * const yy = y; I just want to declare the underlying int data to be unchangeable by func(), not caring whether the caller passes a const int or a mutable int buffer. Is the compiler merely nitpicking or am I getting something wrong fundamentally? Thanks! ~Neels -- - Neels Hofmeyr <nhofmeyr(a)sysmocom.de> http://www.sysmocom.de/ ======================================================================= * sysmocom - systems for mobile communications GmbH * Alt-Moabit 93 * 10559 Berlin, Germany * Sitz / Registered office: Berlin, HRB 134158 B * Geschäftsführer / Managing Directors: Holger Freyther, Harald Welte

9 years, 5 months

[PATCH 1/5] Ignore test binaries

by suraev＠alumni.ntnu.no

From: Max <msuraev(a)sysmocom.de> --- .gitignore | 3 +++ 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) diff --git a/.gitignore b/.gitignore index 598f88a..955634e 100644 --- a/.gitignore +++ b/.gitignore @@ -81,6 +81,9 @@ tests/strrb/strrb_test tests/vty/vty_test tests/gb/gprs_bssgp_test tests/smscb/gsm0341_test +tests/bitvec/bitvec_test +tests/gprs/gprs_test +tests/msgb/msgb_test utils/osmo-arfcn utils/osmo-auc-gen -- 2.5.0

9 years, 5 months

[PATCH 1/2] Cleanup build

by suraev＠alumni.ntnu.no

From: Max <msuraev(a)sysmocom.de> Ignore cross-compilation bild byproducts. Enable subdir-objects to increase compatibility with newer automake. --- .gitignore | 2 ++ configure.ac | 2 +- 2 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/.gitignore b/.gitignore index 6cc9aa5..439f591 100644 --- a/.gitignore +++ b/.gitignore @@ -17,6 +17,8 @@ depcomp install-sh missing libtool +arm*linux*libtool +compile ltmain.sh core diff --git a/configure.ac b/configure.ac index 5274022..7a97954 100644 --- a/configure.ac +++ b/configure.ac @@ -3,7 +3,7 @@ AC_INIT([osmo-pcu], m4_esyscmd([./git-version-gen .tarball-version]), [osmocom-net-gprs(a)lists.osmocom.org]) -AM_INIT_AUTOMAKE([dist-bzip2]) +AM_INIT_AUTOMAKE([dist-bzip2 subdir-objects]) AC_CONFIG_TESTDIR(tests) dnl kernel style compile messages -- 2.5.0

9 years, 5 months

Hardware question

by Ralph A. Schmid, dk5ras

Hi, My intention is setting up a small dedicated box with a PC and some RF hardware for GSM1800. The usage will be mainly SMS and EDGE. Is it still recommended using something like a nanoBTS, with the nitb setup? These are relative cheap, professionally designed. UmTRX looks great, but it is above the financial limit. It will be an experimental setup, but more for demonstrational purpose, so I love the idea of some nice looking plug and play box. It is not intended to extend it, no hand over, no roaming stuff, no interconnection other than IP and maybe SIP. For testing still I have my B210 and a BladeRF, but I do not want to waste such a versatile SDR for some stupid test BTS stuff :) Thanks for any input! Ralph. -- Ralph A. Schmid Mondstr. 10 90762 Fürth +49-171-3631223 ralph(a)schmid.xxx http://www.bclog.de/

9 years, 5 months

[PATCH 1/2] Add missing build leftovers to .gitignore

by suraev＠alumni.ntnu.no

From: Max <msuraev(a)sysmocom.de> --- .gitignore | 3 +++ 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) diff --git a/.gitignore b/.gitignore index 6cc9aa5..46ddeb3 100644 --- a/.gitignore +++ b/.gitignore @@ -6,6 +6,7 @@ Makefile.in Makefile .deps +compile aclocal.m4 autom4te.cache config.log @@ -42,3 +43,5 @@ tests/codel/codel_test tests/emu/pcu_emu tests/testsuite tests/testsuite.log +tests/edge/EdgeTest +tests/llc/LlcTest -- 2.5.0

9 years, 5 months

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

OpenBSC January 2016