osmocom-net-gprs January 2013

osmocom-net-gprs@lists.osmocom.org

6 participants
5 discussions

Idea for synchonous logging/review of debug + GSMTAP
by Harald Welte 30 Jan '13

30 Jan '13

Hi all, one of the problems when debugging PCU issues is: How to take proper logs on-site where a problem shows up and give them back to the developer(s) for analysis. If you capture the PCU stdout or configure file-based logging, you will have a hard time corellating that with PCAP traces taken on the RLC/MAC side and/or on the Gb side. Therefore I propose a new idea here and would like to get your review: What about implementing a "GSMTAP" log target for libosmocore? This way we could encapsulate the log messages into a special GSMTAP message, which would be sent synchronously in the GSMTAP stream together with RLC/MAC messages on the lower end. The same could in fact be utilized in osmo-bts, too. This way we could capture BTS log/debug output in-order to L1 messages that we receive and transmit. What do you think about it? I would be willing to draft the GSMTAP sub-header format and write + submit the wireshark dissector, if somebody wants to write libosmocore log target. Ideally we would log _all_ messages to that target, and include the subsystem and log level in a header field, so the log verbosity could still be adjusted at the point of review, instead only at the time of logging. 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)

4 7

Default build is broken since the 17th of January
by Holger Hans Peter Freyther 21 Jan '13

21 Jan '13

Hi, the default build is broken since the 17th of october. Anynone feels responsible to fix it after the merge? Build results can be seen here[1]. It probably has to with enabling sysmobts support but not direct PDCH queue access. holger [1] http://jenkins.osmocom.org/jenkins/job/osmo-pcu/label=linux_i386_debian_squ…

5 10

lack of progress in PCU patch merging / git (ab)use
by Harald Welte 17 Jan '13

17 Jan '13

Dear all, it is a pity to see that since many weeks there has been no progress on merging any of Andreas' work. I think everyone involved is to be blamed to some extent. Andreas because the provided branches are not kept clean, Ivan probably for lack of time, and me for not paying more attention and helping this process along. The general life-cycle in any project, including osmo-pcu, should be as follows: * contributor starts on some improvements, creates private branch * master advances meanwhile * contributor rebases (not merges!) his changes on top of more recent master * contributor indicates that his branch is ready for merge * maintainer merges (some of?) the commits of the contributor branch * contributor re-bases remaining commits on new master * contributor requests merge of remaing patches ... If I open 'gitk' on any of the branches (master / jolly / jolly_dsp) I get grey hair (to say the least). One would normally expect: 1) 'jolly' to be based on some (maybe not current) master 2) 'jolly_dsp' to be based on 'jolly' Neither of the two is the case. I've tried to * rebase jolly on top of master as well as * rebase jolly_dsp on top of jolly and both are impossible due to the series of merges and the unclear ancestry / relationship of the branches. Or, just for fun, try 'git diff origin/jolly..origin/jolly_dsp. It shows you anything else but what one would expect Andreas: Please take some time to clean up the mess. Your 'jolly' branch should contain a series of clean per-feature commit's on top of current master, and 'jolly_dsp' should be a set of few patches on top of 'jolly'. This way there is always a clean queue of changesets that Ivan can merge (or cherry-pick). I can understand that if I was in Ivan's place, I would not really know where to even start merging some of those contributions. Thanks for everyone's attention. Please take some time to get this resolved. Let me know if you have some questions. There are plenty of people with lots of git experience around (Holger, Pablo, myself) who can help if something is unclear. 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)

5 9

Suspected memory leak in PCU
by Harald Welte 16 Jan '13

16 Jan '13

Hi all, while running osmo-pcu, it appears that it is leaking memory. At startup time it consumes 4188 kBytes of virtual memory (on sysmobts-v2), while after about 8MBytes of data transfer of a single GPRS-MS over 48 hours, the virtual size has expanded to 8584 kBytes. Now I know that VSS is not RSS, etc. - but the fact that it always only increasees, and increases with traffic is a clear indication of some leakage somewehere. Unfortunately it also seems talloc is not used correctly in osmo-pcu, as a USR1 signal doesn't really show any allocated objects beyond two. So somehow either not all allocations are done with talloc, or the allocation hierarchy does not link the objects to the root talloc context. 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)

4 6

Error: PLEASE FIX
by Harald Welte 16 Jan '13

16 Jan '13

Not sure if this is expected or not, I thought it might be useful to report it here: <0001> pcu_l1_if.cpp:295 RACH request received: sapi=1 qta=2, ra=121, fn=12615 <0002> gprs_rlcmac_data.cpp:100 Poll timeout for DL TBF=1 <0005> gprs_rlcmac_data.cpp:872 Got RACH from TLLI=0xc65c8728 while DL TBF=1 still exists. Killing pending DL TBF <0002> gprs_rlcmac.cpp:905 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! This is a single BTS with a single GPRS-capable MS, using TS6+TS7 for PDCH 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)

4 4

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

osmocom-net-gprs January 2013