Hi Neels,
AFAICS you are mixing up "puncturing scheme" and "Coding and Puncturing Scheme", there are still only three puncturing schemes, where up to 3 of them may be used with a certain MCS. The P scheme has to be changed (incremented IIRC) after each use.
Nevertheless choosing a safe value for INVALID is probably not bad if there might be another P in some future spec. But I'd be careful with negative values in enums.
(I didn't check that against the current version of the code, so I might be completely out of sync).
HTH Jacob
On 12/15/2016 12:45 PM, Neels Hofmeyr wrote:
Today I looked at enum egprs_puncturing_values by coincidence:
/*
- Valid puncturing scheme values
- TS 44.060 10.4.8a.3.1, 10.4.8a.2.1, 10.4.8a.1.1
*/ enum egprs_puncturing_values { EGPRS_PS_1, EGPRS_PS_2, EGPRS_PS_3, EGPRS_PS_INVALID, };
...
I would prefer EGPRS_PS_INVALID=-1 (i.e. outside the spec's value range) and the other enum values named appropriately, like EGPRS_MSC4_P1, so that our enum actually reflects the spec as advertised. Is there something I'm missing?
These enum values were added in: commit 7a05b039c835868eff34308d861edfeb28d1763b Author: Aravind Sirsikar arvind.sirsikar@radisys.com Date: Wed Mar 23 18:29:45 2016 +0530
Thanks,
~N