osmocom-net-gprs July 2012

osmocom-net-gprs@lists.osmocom.org

5 participants
10 discussions

Multislot finished and well tested
by jolly 26 Jul '12

26 Jul '12

hi, i like to announce that multislot supports has been finished and is working well. it supports all classes, but i could not test other classes than semi-duplex class 12. the algorithm allocates as many downlink slots as allowed by class and as avaiable. it will only allocate a single uplink slot. there is no dynamic dl/up allocation depending on traffic. the code is located at osmo-pcu: jolly branch: git log 4b470ffe regards, andreas

4 16

talloc, malloc and memory leaks
by Holger Hans Peter Freyther 25 Jul '12

25 Jul '12

Hi, this is not meant as an intensive review on memory allocations in the PCU code. While browsing the code of the ready-to-send method to select the next payload I noticed the code below: RlcMacDownlink_t * mac_control_block = (RlcMacDownlink_t *)malloc(sizeof(RlcMacDownlink_t)); LOGP(DRLCMAC, LOGL_DEBUG, "+++++++++++++++++++++++++ TX : Packet Paging Request +++++++++++++++++++++++++\n"); decode_gsm_rlcmac_downlink(pag_vec, mac_control_block); LOGPC(DCSN1, LOGL_NOTICE, "\n"); LOGP(DRLCMAC, LOGL_DEBUG, "------------------------- TX : Packet Paging Request -------------------------\n"); bitvec_free(pag_vec); This and other all other places really should use talloc to make finding memory leaks more easy (e.g. by printing the leak report), the second part is that we appear to leak this on every paging message sent by the PCU and the third is actually a question. Should we use a GCC extension that helps dealing with local variables? GCC can call a cleanup function on exit of the scope, an example can be seen here[1] nad this[2] is the description of the feature. holger [1] https://mail.gnome.org/archives/gtk-devel-list/2011-November/msg00050.html [2] http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc/Variable-Attributes.html#Variable-Attribu… -- - Holger Freyther <hfreyther(a)sysmocom.de> http://www.sysmocom.de/ ======================================================================= * sysmocom - systems for mobile communications GmbH * Schivelbeiner Str. 5 * 10439 Berlin, Germany * Sitz / Registered office: Berlin, HRB 134158 B * Geschaeftsfuehrer / Managing Directors: Holger Freyther, Harald Welte

2 2

Compiling with clang --analyze
by Holger Hans Peter Freyther 25 Jul '12

25 Jul '12

Hi, one more email for tonight. Using clang/smatch from time to time can highlight certain issues. The easiest way to invoke it is this: $ make CC="clang --analyze" CXX="clang++ --analyze" 1.) gprs_bssgp_pcu.cpp:241:6: warning: Access to field 'state' results in a dereference of a null pointer (loaded from variable 'bctx') if (bctx->state & BVC_S_BLOCKED && pdu_type != BSSGP_PDUT_STATUS) ^~~~ the handling of bctx is a bit weird, in theory it can be NULL but I am not sure if we are likely to receive the messages that would make the PCU crash though. gprs_bssgp_pcu_rcvmsg can call the above function/line with a NULL bctx. 2.) gprs_rlcmac.cpp:728:25: warning: Assigned value is garbage or undefined tbf->dir.ul.usf[ts] = usf[ts]; ^ ~~~~~~~ Probably true, alloc_algorithm_b is really too big to be readable to verify that this is not a false positive. cheers holger -- - Holger Freyther <hfreyther(a)sysmocom.de> http://www.sysmocom.de/ ======================================================================= * sysmocom - systems for mobile communications GmbH * Schivelbeiner Str. 5 * 10439 Berlin, Germany * Sitz / Registered office: Berlin, HRB 134158 B * Geschaeftsfuehrer / Managing Directors: Holger Freyther, Harald Welte

2 1

Re: Multislot finished and well tested
by Andreas Eversberg 24 Jul '12

24 Jul '12

Holger Hans Peter Freyther wrote: > in the above it is possible that !poll_tbf and usf == 0x7, is this the > right behavior in case no TBF could be found? hi holger, if poll_tbf is set, we must use an unassigned usf, because only the polled mobile may transmit. (usf 7 is never assigned.) if poll_tbf is not set and if no uplink ressource is required, i use usf 7 (any other usf would also be ok, since we don't need any mobile to transmit on uplink, but i use 7, because it is never assigend to any mobile). regards, andreas

1 0

[PATCH] misc: Add the libosmocore CFLAGS to the CPPFLAGS
by Holger Hans Peter Freyther 23 Jul '12

23 Jul '12

From: Holger Hans Peter Freyther <holger(a)freyther.de> libosmocore might not be in the standard include path, add the CFLAGS to the preprocessor flags. This is fixing the build on the Osmocom Jenkins. --- src/Makefile.am | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/Makefile.am b/src/Makefile.am index 041831f..98574fa 100644 --- a/src/Makefile.am +++ b/src/Makefile.am @@ -18,7 +18,7 @@ # along with this program. If not, see <http://www.gnu.org/licenses/>. # -AM_CPPFLAGS = $(STD_DEFINES_AND_INCLUDES) +AM_CPPFLAGS = $(STD_DEFINES_AND_INCLUDES) $(LIBOSMOCORE_CFLAGS) $(LIBOSMOGB_CFLAGS) $(LIBOSMOGSM_CFLAGS) AM_CXXFLAGS = -Wall -ldl -pthread noinst_LTLIBRARIES = libgprs.la -- 1.7.10.4

2 1

[PATCH] misc: Fix typos in the comments
by Holger Hans Peter Freyther 23 Jul '12

23 Jul '12

From: Holger Hans Peter Freyther <holger(a)freyther.de> ressource -> resorce shure -> sure --- src/gprs_bssgp_pcu.cpp | 4 ++-- src/gprs_rlcmac.cpp | 14 +++++++------- src/gprs_rlcmac.h | 2 +- src/gprs_rlcmac_data.cpp | 10 +++++----- src/gprs_rlcmac_sched.cpp | 20 ++++++++++---------- src/tbf.txt | 2 +- 6 files changed, 26 insertions(+), 26 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/gprs_bssgp_pcu.cpp b/src/gprs_bssgp_pcu.cpp index 217acdb..dc8e454 100644 --- a/src/gprs_bssgp_pcu.cpp +++ b/src/gprs_bssgp_pcu.cpp @@ -190,7 +190,7 @@ int gprs_bssgp_pcu_rx_dl_ud(struct msgb *msg, struct tlv_parsed *tp) // Create new TBF (any TRX) tfi = tfi_alloc(GPRS_RLCMAC_DL_TBF, &trx, &ts, use_trx, first_ts); if (tfi < 0) { - LOGP(DRLCMAC, LOGL_NOTICE, "No PDCH ressource\n"); + LOGP(DRLCMAC, LOGL_NOTICE, "No PDCH resource\n"); /* FIXME: send reject */ return -EBUSY; } @@ -198,7 +198,7 @@ int gprs_bssgp_pcu_rx_dl_ud(struct msgb *msg, struct tlv_parsed *tp) tbf = tbf_alloc(tbf, GPRS_RLCMAC_DL_TBF, tfi, trx, ts, ms_class, ss); if (!tbf) { - LOGP(DRLCMAC, LOGL_NOTICE, "No PDCH ressource\n"); + LOGP(DRLCMAC, LOGL_NOTICE, "No PDCH resource\n"); /* FIXME: send reject */ return -EBUSY; } diff --git a/src/gprs_rlcmac.cpp b/src/gprs_rlcmac.cpp index d1f0b54..5284260 100644 --- a/src/gprs_rlcmac.cpp +++ b/src/gprs_rlcmac.cpp @@ -80,7 +80,7 @@ llist_head *gprs_rlcmac_tbfs_lists[] = { }; void *rlcmac_tall_ctx; -/* FIXME: spread ressources over multiple TRX. Also add option to use same +/* FIXME: spread resources over multiple TRX. Also add option to use same * TRX in case of existing TBF for TLLI in the other direction. */ /* search for free TFI and return TFI, TRX and first TS */ int tfi_alloc(enum gprs_rlcmac_tbf_direction dir, uint8_t *_trx, uint8_t *_ts, @@ -264,7 +264,7 @@ struct gprs_rlcmac_tbf *tbf_alloc(struct gprs_rlcmac_tbf *old_tbf, else rc = bts->alloc_algorithm(old_tbf, tbf, bts->alloc_algorithm_curst); - /* if no ressource */ + /* if no resource */ if (rc < 0) { talloc_free(tbf); return NULL; @@ -272,7 +272,7 @@ struct gprs_rlcmac_tbf *tbf_alloc(struct gprs_rlcmac_tbf *old_tbf, /* assign control ts */ tbf->control_ts = 0xff; rc = tbf_assign_control_ts(tbf); - /* if no ressource */ + /* if no resource */ if (rc < 0) { talloc_free(tbf); return NULL; @@ -767,12 +767,12 @@ void tbf_free(struct gprs_rlcmac_tbf *tbf) LOGP(DRLCMAC, LOGL_ERROR, "Software error: Pending uplink " "assignment. This may not happen, because the " "assignment message never gets transmitted. Please " - "be shure not to free in this state. PLEASE FIX!\n"); + "be sure not to free in this state. PLEASE FIX!\n"); if (tbf->dl_ass_state != GPRS_RLCMAC_DL_ASS_NONE) LOGP(DRLCMAC, LOGL_ERROR, "Software error: Pending downlink " "assignment. This may not happen, because the " "assignment message never gets transmitted. Please " - "be shure not to free in this state. PLEASE FIX!\n"); + "be sure not to free in this state. PLEASE FIX!\n"); tbf_timer_stop(tbf); while ((msg = msgb_dequeue(&tbf->llc_queue))) msgb_free(msg); @@ -802,9 +802,9 @@ int tbf_update(struct gprs_rlcmac_tbf *tbf) tbf_unlink_pdch(tbf); rc = bts->alloc_algorithm(ul_tbf, tbf, bts->alloc_algorithm_curst); - /* if no ressource */ + /* if no resource */ if (rc < 0) { - LOGP(DRLCMAC, LOGL_ERROR, "No ressource after update???\n"); + LOGP(DRLCMAC, LOGL_ERROR, "No resource after update???\n"); return -rc; } diff --git a/src/gprs_rlcmac.h b/src/gprs_rlcmac.h index 71ff608..fbae677 100644 --- a/src/gprs_rlcmac.h +++ b/src/gprs_rlcmac.h @@ -99,7 +99,7 @@ extern struct gprs_rlcmac_bts *gprs_rlcmac_bts; enum gprs_rlcmac_tbf_state { GPRS_RLCMAC_NULL = 0, /* new created TBF */ GPRS_RLCMAC_ASSIGN, /* wait for downlink assignment */ - GPRS_RLCMAC_FLOW, /* RLC/MAC flow, ressource needed */ + GPRS_RLCMAC_FLOW, /* RLC/MAC flow, resource needed */ GPRS_RLCMAC_FINISHED, /* flow finished, wait for release */ GPRS_RLCMAC_WAIT_RELEASE,/* wait for release or restart of DL TBF */ GPRS_RLCMAC_RELEASING, /* releasing, wait to free TBI/USF */ diff --git a/src/gprs_rlcmac_data.cpp b/src/gprs_rlcmac_data.cpp index 2f67bd0..b56d63d 100644 --- a/src/gprs_rlcmac_data.cpp +++ b/src/gprs_rlcmac_data.cpp @@ -220,7 +220,7 @@ uplink_request: /* create new TBF, use sme TRX as DL TBF */ tfi = tfi_alloc(GPRS_RLCMAC_UL_TBF, &trx, &ts, tbf->trx, tbf->first_ts); if (tfi < 0) { - LOGP(DRLCMAC, LOGL_NOTICE, "No PDCH ressource\n"); + LOGP(DRLCMAC, LOGL_NOTICE, "No PDCH resource\n"); /* FIXME: send reject */ break; } @@ -228,7 +228,7 @@ uplink_request: ul_tbf = tbf_alloc(tbf, GPRS_RLCMAC_UL_TBF, tfi, trx, ts, tbf->ms_class, 0); if (!ul_tbf) { - LOGP(DRLCMAC, LOGL_NOTICE, "No PDCH ressource\n"); + LOGP(DRLCMAC, LOGL_NOTICE, "No PDCH resource\n"); /* FIXME: send reject */ break; } @@ -269,7 +269,7 @@ uplink_request: } tlli = tbf->tlli; } - LOGP(DRLCMAC, LOGL_ERROR, "RX: [PCU <- BTS] %s TFI: %u TLLI: 0x%08x FIXME: Packet ressource request\n", (tbf->direction == GPRS_RLCMAC_UL_TBF) ? "UL" : "DL", tbf->tfi, tbf->tlli); + LOGP(DRLCMAC, LOGL_ERROR, "RX: [PCU <- BTS] %s TFI: %u TLLI: 0x%08x FIXME: Packet resource request\n", (tbf->direction == GPRS_RLCMAC_UL_TBF) ? "UL" : "DL", tbf->tfi, tbf->tlli); break; default: LOGP(DRLCMAC, LOGL_NOTICE, "RX: [PCU <- BTS] unknown control block received\n"); @@ -838,14 +838,14 @@ int gprs_rlcmac_rcv_rach(uint8_t ra, uint32_t Fn, int16_t qta) // Create new TBF tfi = tfi_alloc(GPRS_RLCMAC_UL_TBF, &trx, &ts, -1, -1); if (tfi < 0) { - LOGP(DRLCMAC, LOGL_NOTICE, "No PDCH ressource\n"); + LOGP(DRLCMAC, LOGL_NOTICE, "No PDCH resource\n"); /* FIXME: send reject */ return -EBUSY; } /* set class to 0, since we don't know the multislot class yet */ tbf = tbf_alloc(NULL, GPRS_RLCMAC_UL_TBF, tfi, trx, ts, 0, 1); if (!tbf) { - LOGP(DRLCMAC, LOGL_NOTICE, "No PDCH ressource\n"); + LOGP(DRLCMAC, LOGL_NOTICE, "No PDCH resource\n"); /* FIXME: send reject */ return -EBUSY; } diff --git a/src/gprs_rlcmac_sched.cpp b/src/gprs_rlcmac_sched.cpp index f6af9b7..83a89ac 100644 --- a/src/gprs_rlcmac_sched.cpp +++ b/src/gprs_rlcmac_sched.cpp @@ -90,7 +90,7 @@ int gprs_rlcmac_rcv_rts_block(uint8_t trx, uint8_t ts, uint16_t arfcn, ul_ass_tbf = tbf; } - /* check uplink ressource for polling */ + /* check uplink resource for polling */ if (poll_tbf) { LOGP(DRLCMACSCHED, LOGL_DEBUG, "Received RTS for PDCH: TRX=%d " "TS=%d FN=%d block_nr=%d scheduling free USF for " @@ -99,17 +99,17 @@ int gprs_rlcmac_rcv_rts_block(uint8_t trx, uint8_t ts, uint16_t arfcn, (tbf->direction == GPRS_RLCMAC_UL_TBF) ? "UL" : "DL", poll_tbf->tfi); /* use free USF */ - /* else, we search for uplink ressource */ + /* else, we search for uplink resource */ } else { - /* select uplink ressource */ + /* select uplink resource */ for (i = 0, tfi = pdch->next_ul_tfi; i < 32; i++, tfi = (tfi + 1) & 31) { tbf = pdch->ul_tbf[tfi]; /* no TBF for this tfi, go next */ if (!tbf) continue; - /* no UL ressources needed, go next */ - /* we don't need to give ressources in FINISHED state, + /* no UL resources needed, go next */ + /* we don't need to give resources in FINISHED state, * because we have received all blocks and only poll * for packet control ack. */ if (tbf->state != GPRS_RLCMAC_FLOW) @@ -119,9 +119,9 @@ int gprs_rlcmac_rcv_rts_block(uint8_t trx, uint8_t ts, uint16_t arfcn, usf = tbf->dir.ul.usf[ts]; LOGP(DRLCMACSCHED, LOGL_DEBUG, "Received RTS for PDCH: " "TRX=%d TS=%d FN=%d block_nr=%d scheduling " - "USF=%d for required uplink ressource of " + "USF=%d for required uplink resource of " "UL TBF=%d\n", trx, ts, fn, block_nr, usf, tfi); - /* next TBF to handle ressource is the next one */ + /* next TBF to handle resource is the next one */ pdch->next_ul_tfi = (tfi + 1) & 31; break; } @@ -160,7 +160,7 @@ int gprs_rlcmac_rcv_rts_block(uint8_t trx, uint8_t ts, uint16_t arfcn, /* Prio 2: select data message for downlink */ if (!msg) { - /* select downlink ressource */ + /* select downlink resource */ for (i = 0, tfi = pdch->next_dl_tfi; i < 32; i++, tfi = (tfi + 1) & 31) { tbf = pdch->dl_tbf[tfi]; @@ -170,7 +170,7 @@ int gprs_rlcmac_rcv_rts_block(uint8_t trx, uint8_t ts, uint16_t arfcn, /* no DL TBF, go next */ if (tbf->direction != GPRS_RLCMAC_DL_TBF) continue; - /* no DL ressources needed, go next */ + /* no DL resources needed, go next */ if (tbf->state != GPRS_RLCMAC_FLOW && tbf->state != GPRS_RLCMAC_FINISHED) continue; @@ -178,7 +178,7 @@ int gprs_rlcmac_rcv_rts_block(uint8_t trx, uint8_t ts, uint16_t arfcn, LOGP(DRLCMACSCHED, LOGL_DEBUG, "Scheduling data " "message at RTS for DL TBF=%d (TRX=%d, " "TS=%d)\n", tfi, trx, ts); - /* next TBF to handle ressource is the next one */ + /* next TBF to handle resource is the next one */ pdch->next_dl_tfi = (tfi + 1) & 31; /* generate DL data block */ msg = gprs_rlcmac_send_data_block_acknowledged(tbf, fn, diff --git a/src/tbf.txt b/src/tbf.txt index eab58ba..025e56c 100644 --- a/src/tbf.txt +++ b/src/tbf.txt @@ -118,7 +118,7 @@ Control TS: Polling: In order to poll uplink control block from MS, a special poll state and frame number is stored at TBF. The scheduler reads that value and will not - assign uplink ressource for other TBFs at that frame number. + assign uplink resource for other TBFs at that frame number. When there is no uplink transmission received on the block, a timeout is indicated by layer 1 interface. There are two ways of checking timeout: -- 1.7.10.4

2 1

git tree / branches / ancestor?
by Harald Welte 11 Jul '12

11 Jul '12

Hi all! while reviewing the current PCU code in the git repository, it occurred to me that somehow the jolly_new branch doesn't seem to be based on master, and the only common ancestor is 9b06ff0c4c49f1927b9029d38e16670a7b7301fb from June 15. In fact, Ivan seems to have made a number of changes concurrently with Andreas, but not basing on each other's code. It's really a big mess, from what I can tell. I'm referring to the followign commit's by Ivan: a9e6dc5084627e7c279ba08de7a7809e97ebc539 d78ee736239414021fde8010179f42b86464a238 Which are completely unrelated to the work that Andreas has been doing at the same time (all his commit's from 2012-06-27 on, i.e. 39621c41f303e24b7324dc4c91447a449d2a654b and later. I strongly recomend that you coordinate more and re-view each others' code better. And regarding the messy situatin with master vs. jolly_new: I think the only practical solution is to drop one of the two parallel and incompatible changes regarding the RLC/MAC and TBF establishment changes. Do you have any input on how to resolve this specific issue? I think none of us can afford to waste resources on duplication of work and creating virtually un-mergeable branches :/ Regards, Harald -- - Harald Welte <laforge(a)gnumonks.org> http://laforge.gnumonks.org/ ============================================================================ "Privacy in residential applications is a desirable marketing option." (ETSI EN 300 175-7 Ch. A6)

3 2

bug in common/oml.c of osmo-bts?
by Andreas Eversberg 11 Jul '12

11 Jul '12

hi laforge, just curios about two lines at oml.c: rlcc->parameter[T_DL_TBF_EXT] = *(uint16_t *)cur * 10; rlcc->parameter[T_UL_TBF_EXT] = *(uint16_t *)cur * 10; 1. isnt it * 2 instead of * 10? i just saw a comment at openbsc for 0, 250 which says: 500. 2. did you forget ntoh(*(uint16_t *)cur)? regards, andreas

2 1

TBF acknowledged mode is now working
by jolly 06 Jul '12

06 Jul '12

hi, finally the TBF acknowledge mode works in up- and downlink. i have tested it with attachment/detachment and routing area update. changes are commited to jolly branch. don't be shocked, but there great changes to previous gprs_rlcmac.cpp code. it is split into three sources: - gprs_rlcmac.cpp: general functions to handle TBF instances, hand-hacked codings - gprs_rlcmac_data.cpp: handling of uplink and downlink TBF - gprs_rlcmac_sched.cpp: scheduler to handle ready-to-send requests. during packet idle mode, assignment of up- or downlink TBF is performed using IMMEDIATE ASSIGMENT on AGCH. during TBF uplink, downlink assignment is performed using PACKET DOWNLINK ASSIGNMENT on PACCH. after TBF downlink, further downlink assignment is performed using PACKET DOWNLINK ASSIGNMENT. during TBF downlink, uplink assignment is performed using PACKET UPLINK assignment. this way an attachment / RA update / detach will complete while staying in packet transfer mode, so no further assignment must be done on AGCH. the acknowledged mode keeps states about transmitted and received blocks, so unreceived or unacknowledged block are retransmitted as defined in TS 04.60. downlink RLC/MAC data and control blocks are not queued, but generated at ready-to-send request from layer 1. a scheduler is used to schedule next RLC/MAC block. it uses round-robin scheduling, if more than two flows are active in one direction. in downlink direction, control blocks are prioized. in uplink direction, polling of mobile is priorized. (USF is set to apply uplink ressource to MS.) only one timeslot (first PDCH) is used to share the ressources, currently. there is a short description (tbf.txt) about states and the process of current code. in order to detect missing responses on polling MS, a gprs_rlcmac_poll_timeout() function is called. layer 1 interface must implement detection of missed polled uplink control blocks. there are two ways to perform this: - The received frame is bad (BFI). - The GSM indicates that the block should have been already received. currently pcu_l1_if.c is broken, because none of the detection above is performed. best regards, andreas

3 4

Re: osmo-pcu.git branch jolly updated. f3d060c6310bfa979225b871ba463284d3cda887
by Alexander Chemeris 05 Jul '12

05 Jul '12

Hi Andreas, I've looked through your commits and looks like you're doing a very quick progress. Your changes are overlapping with Ivan's work and I would recommend to merge them the master as often as possible to avoid duplicated efforts and code divergence. From this quick review I've got impression that code needs clean up before the merge, so it would be good if you share your plans on this. As a general comment, I think we could do merging of your code into master, but it would be much, much easier if you commit in smaller "atomic" chunks. E.g. these two last commits contain more changes then is written in the commit logs and in my opinion should be splitted into several independent commits. Note, that I just want to share my opinion and it's up to you and Ivan to decide how to work together efficiently. On Thu, Jul 5, 2012 at 6:42 AM, git repository hosting <gitosis(a)osmocom.org> wrote: > This is an automated email from the git hooks/post-receive script. It was > generated because a ref change was pushed to the repository containing > the project "UNNAMED PROJECT". > > The branch, jolly has been updated > via f3d060c6310bfa979225b871ba463284d3cda887 (commit) > via 06b195e43e36c0b5100ab03e80fcc87a10db9fc5 (commit) > from e6228b34a75efcb6b0700ac29672d62539860fbf (commit) > > Those revisions listed above that are new to this repository have > not appeared on any other notification email; so we list those > revisions in full, below. > > - Log ----------------------------------------------------------------- > http://cgit.osmocom.org/cgit/osmo-pcu/commit/?id=f3d060c6310bfa979225b871ba… > > commit f3d060c6310bfa979225b871ba463284d3cda887 > Author: Andreas Eversberg <jolly(a)eversberg.eu> > Date: Thu Jul 5 07:38:49 2012 +0200 > > Fixed pseudo length of IMMEDIATE ASSIGNMENT message. > > The pseudo length may not include the rest-octets, so it stays compatible > to non-GPRS phones. > > At pcu_l1_if.c (OpenBTS) no pseudo length is given, so the frame is > only 22 bytes long. I could not test if it works. > > http://cgit.osmocom.org/cgit/osmo-pcu/commit/?id=06b195e43e36c0b5100ab03e80… > > commit 06b195e43e36c0b5100ab03e80fcc87a10db9fc5 > Author: Andreas Eversberg <jolly(a)eversberg.eu> > Date: Thu Jul 5 07:34:29 2012 +0200 > > Use cell informations received from PCU socket interface > > Cell info is received from socket interface. The given parameters are > used to replace the hardcoded values (at least for l1 socket interface). > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Summary of changes: > configure.ac | 8 ++ > src/Makefile.am | 19 ++---- > src/gprs_bssgp_pcu.cpp | 178 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-- > src/gprs_bssgp_pcu.h | 24 ++---- > src/gprs_debug.cpp | 2 +- > src/gprs_rlcmac.cpp | 41 ++++++----- > src/gprs_rlcmac.h | 25 ++++--- > src/gprs_rlcmac_data.cpp | 79 +++++++++++++------- > src/pcu_l1_if.cpp | 37 +++++++++- > src/pcu_main.cpp | 123 ++++++++++++++++++-------------- > src/sysmo_l1_if.cpp | 94 ++++++++++++++++++++++--- > 11 files changed, 471 insertions(+), 159 deletions(-) > > > hooks/post-receive > -- > UNNAMED PROJECT > -- Regards, Alexander Chemeris. CEO, Fairwaves LLC / ООО УмРадио http://fairwaves.ru

1 0

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

osmocom-net-gprs July 2012