On Sat, Jan 04, 2014 at 04:19:34PM +0100, Andreas Eversberg wrote:
dear holger,
dear andreas,
i added serveral fixes that showed up with your test code. i have pushed them to the jolly/allocation-fixes branch. in also includes a fix for the missing incrementation of 'i' in select_first_ts() and select_ul_slots().
I merged your changes and the crazy test that tested all combinations started to work so I went ahead an merged your change. What Daniel (and the jenkins) noticed is that I didn't update the test result. I asked him to update the test result but he pointed out that there appears to be a genuine regression:
@@ -409,7 +409,6 @@ PDCH[5] is first common for DL PDCH[5] is used for UL PDCH[6] is used for UL -PDCH[7] is used for UL PDCH[5] is control_ts for UL PDCH[5] is first common for UL PDCH[5] is used for DL @@ -420,7 +419,6 @@ Testing jolly example PDCH[1] is used for UL PDCH[2] is used for UL -PDCH[3] is used for UL PDCH[1] is control_ts for UL PDCH[1] is first common for UL PDCH[1] is used for DL
so it appears that the multislot algorithm started to not assign/use the last timeslot. Could you please have a look at that?
i have no fix for the USF problem. if the first_common_ts on concurrent TBFs is different, we should reject the TBF by sending a Packet Access Reject, but this message is also not implemented.
I will add a todo to the code.