Change in osmo-bsc[master]: power_control: send RSL_IE_{MS, BS}_POWER_PARAM on CHANnel ACTIVation

[fixeria]

fixeria has posted comments on this change. ( https://gerrit.osmocom.org/c/osmo-bsc/+/21787 )

Change subject: power_control: send RSL_IE_{MS,BS}_POWER_PARAM on CHANnel ACTIVation
......................................................................


Patch Set 1:

(1 comment)

https://gerrit.osmocom.org/c/osmo-bsc/+/21787/1/src/osmo-bsc/abis_rsl.c 
File src/osmo-bsc/abis_rsl.c:

https://gerrit.osmocom.org/c/osmo-bsc/+/21787/1/src/osmo-bsc/abis_rsl.c@516 
PS1, Line 516: 		msgb_tlv_put(msg, tag, 0, NULL);
> TThe 2 switch cases above (nanobts, osmobts), are afaiu the same as the default one when calling a enc_power_rams as a NOOP, am I correct?

Yes, if bts->model->enc_power_params() would append no vendor-specific IEs, then we get an empty TLV (L=0) like in the two cases above. If bts->model->enc_power_params is NULL, then MS/BS Power Parameters IE is not included at all.

> So if we have an abstracted way to set the IE contents (enc_power_params func pointer), why do we want to have this switch case for osmobts and nanobts?

Because ip.access models allow us to send all parameters only once, in "Measurement Pre-processing Defaults" message, and then avoid repeating them again and again in CHANnel ACTIVation messages. So we use this possibility here. For other BTS models you still need to send those parameters in every CHANnel ACTIVation message.

And I intentionally kept this decision logic (whether to send an empty IE) separate from bts->model->enc_power_params(), because this function does not (and is not supposed to) know in which cases we should skip parameters and in which we should add them.



-- 
To view, visit https://gerrit.osmocom.org/c/osmo-bsc/+/21787
To unsubscribe, or for help writing mail filters, visit https://gerrit.osmocom.org/settings

Gerrit-Project: osmo-bsc
Gerrit-Branch: master
Gerrit-Change-Id: I586b1c9e16390757b015c2871a36abc3975e0fc4
Gerrit-Change-Number: 21787
Gerrit-PatchSet: 1
Gerrit-Owner: fixeria <vyanitskiy at sysmocom.de>
Gerrit-Reviewer: Jenkins Builder
Gerrit-CC: pespin <pespin at sysmocom.de>
Gerrit-Comment-Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2020 17:44:04 +0000
Gerrit-HasComments: Yes
Gerrit-Has-Labels: No
Comment-In-Reply-To: pespin <pespin at sysmocom.de>
Comment-In-Reply-To: fixeria <vyanitskiy at sysmocom.de>
Gerrit-MessageType: comment
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osmocom.org/pipermail/gerrit-log/attachments/20201218/37c6e9c6/attachment.htm>