This is merely a historical archive of years 2008-2021, before the migration to mailman3.
A maintained and still updated list archive can be found at https://lists.osmocom.org/hyperkitty/list/OpenBSC@lists.osmocom.org/.
Alexander Chemeris alexander.chemeris at gmail.comHi Holger, On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 10:50 AM, Holger Freyther <holger at freyther.de> wrote: >> On 24 Jun 2015, at 00:27, Alexander Chemeris <alexander.chemeris at gmail.com> wrote: >> Please note that the current behavior of this command is that it >> already applies the change immediately by setting bts->ms_max_power. >> This value is then used at rsl_rx_chan_rqd() to initialize >> lchan->ms_power. But it does not apply it to SIs sent by the same BTS, >> which makes the effect of the command inconsistent. The commit I >> suggest just makes the behavior of the command consistent. > > we have completed the circle now and I don’t want to run another round. The > ms_max_power aspect is annoying but it shows that we need to progress and > look at the bigger picture. Are you willing to do that? In the spirit of scratching the itch, I do need the ms_max_power patch, as it fixes an obvious issue and I want to share it with the community. I'm fine maintaining it шт a branch if it's not good enough for the master. OTOH I don't have an itch with the lack of “commit”/“apply” functionality, so it's hard for me to discuss it - I don't know requirements and use cases. I see a theoretical value of it, but relying on theoretical values is a sure way to over-engineer in my experience. If you have a real need for it, then you're probably much more qualified to look at it. I hope that's fair enough. -- Regards, Alexander Chemeris. CEO, Fairwaves, Inc. https://fairwaves.co