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/.
Gullik Webjorn gullik.webjorn at corevalue.seA small update from Sweden, I have built LimeSuite and osmo-trx-lms from source, this time on a Intel Atom, i386 distribution. I have redirected the bts - trx ip addresses, and yes, I could briefly see the beacon, and i managed to get two phones on the network, though not stable. However, I can see the exact behaviour of the osmo-trx-lms as on the armhf kit, i.e. the logging of a single L like this... Sat Jan 5 11:58:42 2019 DLMS <0003> LMSDevice.cpp:102 [tid=3021294672] L I have not verified that the reason is exactly the same yet, since I don't have debug environment on the 386 yet, but the symptom is exactly the same, with strange length packets and a lot of packet flushing, all probably related to recovering synch. This reduces the previously assumed probability that the problem lies in hardware or hardware related software (armbian Linux) , but actually is a memory problem within osmo-trx (lms) What is relatively easy is to move the B100 to the "new" platform, and try to isolate the problem with regards to uhd device vs. lms device, so I will do that test and report back. Regards, Gullik On 2019-01-06 16:30, Gullik Webjorn wrote: > Hello Gentlemen, ( and Ladies also of course ) > > Here is again a small Monologue from me, with an attempt to fix a bug.... > > My osmo-trx-lms is not stable, and I have reported it's strange > behaviour. > > Some things made me think of memory corruption, and when I found that > one thread > > was logging a single letter "L" suspicion increased.... > > I have rebuilt the debian package from source, and tried to have a > look at the log message print, > > but failed to place a breakpoint in LMSDevice.cpp:102 with meaningful > result, typically gdb > > could not retrieve general registers....again, memory corruption?? > > However, after numerous tries I managed to "continue" the correct > number of times to hit exactly > > the right instance of the breakpoint, without trx-lms giving up due to > timeouts, > > and here is a bt when this happens: > > (gdb) bt > #0 lms_log_callback (lvl=<optimized out>, msg=0xb415353c "L") at > LMSDevice.cpp:102 > #1 0xb6d0c6c8 in lime::log(lime::LogLevel, char const*, > std::__va_list) () from > /usr/lib/arm-linux-gnueabihf/libLimeSuite.so.18.10-1 > #2 0xb6d26b22 in ?? () from > /usr/lib/arm-linux-gnueabihf/libLimeSuite.so.18.10-1 > #3 0xb6d299f6 in ?? () from > /usr/lib/arm-linux-gnueabihf/libLimeSuite.so.18.10-1 > #4 0xb6c75a6a in ?? () from /usr/lib/arm-linux-gnueabihf/libstdc++.so.6 > #5 0xb6fab5e8 in start_thread () from > /lib/arm-linux-gnueabihf/libpthread.so.0 > #6 0xb6aee4fa in ?? () from /lib/arm-linux-gnueabihf/libc.so.6 > Backtrace stopped: previous frame identical to this frame (corrupt > stack?) > (gdb) > > Last line: corrupt stack ?? > > Since I have had very little reaction, I deduce that most of you > developers do NOT use my particular make of CPU, > > so this might be related to the Armbian ( Debian 9 ) I am running on > this particular hardware. I am using the armhf > > variety of the source. > > Next step for me is rebuilding LimeSuite from source to get debugging > info, so that backtraces etc. become more meaningful. > > The thinking here is that the subtle error in logging has a more > general cause, and that memory corruption surely prevents > > the program to operate stable and as intended.... > > Best Regards, > > Gullik > > > > > > On 2019-01-05 21:54, Gullik Webjorn wrote: >> Well, we just have to find out what is happening. I have currently >> built the trx-lms from source, so >> >> once I can figure out how to build with debug....without breaking >> everything.... >> >> In the mean time: >> >> <0015> input/ipa.c:262 accept()ed new link from 127.0.0.1 to port 3002 >> <0004> abis_nm.c:538 BTS0 feature 'EGPRS' reported via OML does not >> match statically set feature: 0 != 1. Please fix. >> <0004> abis_nm.c:538 BTS0 feature 'OML Alerts' reported via OML does >> not match statically set feature: 1 != 0. Please fix. >> <0004> abis_nm.c:538 BTS0 feature 'CBCH' reported via OML does not >> match statically set feature: 1 != 0. Please fix. >> <0004> abis_nm.c:538 BTS0 feature 'Fullrate speech V1' reported via >> OML does not match statically set feature: 1 != 0. Please fix. >> <0004> abis_nm.c:538 BTS0 feature 'Halfrate speech V1' reported via >> OML does not match statically set feature: 1 != 0. Please fix. >> <0004> abis_nm.c:538 BTS0 feature 'Fullrate speech EFR' reported via >> OML does not match statically set feature: 1 != 0. Please fix. >> <0004> abis_nm.c:538 BTS0 feature 'Fullrate speech AMR' reported via >> OML does not match statically set feature: 1 != 0. Please fix. >> <0004> abis_nm.c:538 BTS0 feature 'Halfrate speech AMR' reported via >> OML does not match statically set feature: 1 != 0. Please fix. >> <0004> abis_nm.c:494 BTS0 Attribute Manufacturer Dependent State is >> unreported >> >> Yes, it would be nice to fix, I imagine this is a configuration >> mismatch, where should these be set, and using what keywords? >> >> This also indicates a problem, but I am to much a beginner to realize >> its importance..... >> >> <0003> osmo_bsc_main.c:284 bootstrapping RSL for BTS/TRX (0/0) on >> ARFCN 871 using MCC-MNC 001-01 LAC=1 CID=0 BSIC=63 >> <0011> bts_ipaccess_nanobts.c:315 >> timeslot(0-0-0-CCCH_SDCCH4)[0xe641d0]{UNUSED}: Event TS_EV_OML_READY >> not permitted >> <0011> bts_ipaccess_nanobts.c:315 >> timeslot(0-0-1-TCH_F)[0xe64530]{UNUSED}: Event TS_EV_OML_READY not >> permitted >> <0011> bts_ipaccess_nanobts.c:315 >> timeslot(0-0-2-TCH_F)[0xe64890]{UNUSED}: Event TS_EV_OML_READY not >> permitted >> <0011> bts_ipaccess_nanobts.c:315 >> timeslot(0-0-3-TCH_F)[0xe64bf0]{UNUSED}: Event TS_EV_OML_READY not >> permitted >> <0011> bts_ipaccess_nanobts.c:315 >> timeslot(0-0-4-TCH_F)[0xe64f50]{UNUSED}: Event TS_EV_OML_READY not >> permitted >> <0011> bts_ipaccess_nanobts.c:315 >> timeslot(0-0-5-TCH_F)[0xe652b0]{UNUSED}: Event TS_EV_OML_READY not >> permitted >> <0011> bts_ipaccess_nanobts.c:315 >> timeslot(0-0-6-TCH_F)[0xe65610]{UNUSED}: Event TS_EV_OML_READY not >> permitted >> <0011> bts_ipaccess_nanobts.c:315 >> timeslot(0-0-7-TCH_F)[0xe65970]{UNUSED}: Event TS_EV_OML_READY not >> permitted >> <0015> input/ipaccess.c:248 Sign link vanished, dead socket >> >> Is it because BSC and BTS are out of sync over their A-if ? As a >> consequence of trx restart ?? >> >> Regards, >> >> Gullik >> >> >> >> On 2019-01-05 12:02, Gullik Webjorn wrote: >>> I have found an interesting log entry, I cannot see where it is >>> called... >>> >>> Sat Jan 5 11:58:42 2019 DDEV <0002> LMSDevice.cpp:386 >>> [tid=3070102608] chan 0: Setting TX gain to 73 dB >>> Sat Jan 5 11:58:42 2019 DLMS <0003> LMSDevice.cpp:102 >>> [tid=3021294672] L >>> Sat Jan 5 11:58:42 2019 DMAIN <0000> Transceiver.cpp:1039 >>> [tid=3012840528] ClockInterface: sending IND CLOCK 920402 >>> >>> the message of a single L seems a little cryptic, and I have not >>> found it's origin...... >>> >>> Gullik >>>