- 20 Jan, 2017 12 commits
-
-
Cedric Roux authored
this commit is here to help debug the previous ones. It has to be reverted at some point.
-
Cedric Roux authored
We put an abort() at this point in the code, because if the previous commit is correct, the program will never comme here.
-
Cedric Roux authored
The previous version did not seem to work properly with several UEs. I too often ended up with a list 'next' where next[i] = i, leading to an infinite loop, crashing the processing. The sorting functions were hard to understand and too slow anyway (O(n*n)). We now use qsort_r and comparison functions, that should define the same order as the previous version. One important point is that the "next" lists and the "head" variable are now considered invalid before calling sort_UE. So all the code (coming before sort_UE) that looped using those variables has been rewritten to loop over all possible UEs and the first instruction of the loop is to exit the loop if the UE is not 'active'. There is room for improvement here. We will reintroduce a list of some kind at some point. Let's first have something that works and then optimize. Today NUMBER_OF_UE_MAX is 16, that's not a big deal. Consequently, the add_new_ue and rrc_mac_remove_ue have also been rewritten, hopefully for the better. This commit is not a basic work and may introduce some problems.
-
Cedric Roux authored
The RA process may be in the state: RA_active == FALSE and wait_ack_Msg4 == 1 Testing only the rnti should be enough, if everything else works properly. Also, don't break, just in case. (Not sure it makes a difference.)
-
Cedric Roux authored
-
Cedric Roux authored
-
Cedric Roux authored
The previous version was calling taus(), which may return any value in [0..65535]. The new version restricts it to [1024..59999] (arbitrary values, big enough, and in the valid range). It also checks that the new RNTI is not already present in the MAC. I think we should also check that it's not used by a RA process. The "loop" thing may not be the best solution either. To be refined.
-
Cedric Roux authored
A RA process is not available if and RA_template[i].wait_ack_Msg4 != 0 We can have RA_active==FALSE and wait_ack_Msg4==1, in which case the RA process is in use and cannot be reassigned.
-
Cedric Roux authored
What if it's -1? Is it possible? We catch the case and abort. We may do a proper fix if the case happen. I don't think it will, but who knows...
-
Cedric Roux authored
RRC does not work very well when one UE goes away and comes back in some situations. This commit is an attempt at making things work better. It is probably not the end of the story.
-
Cedric Roux authored
It resulted in wrong log message, leading to complicated debugging.
-
Cedric Roux authored
-
- 19 Jan, 2017 5 commits
-
-
Cedric Roux authored
-
Cedric Roux authored
Modern UEs have very long UE capabilities. It disrupts realtime behaviour of the modem. Let's put a simple log message indicating we got the UE capabilities.
-
Cedric Roux authored
Here is the problem: Sometimes the UE has no PHY context but is still present in the MAC with 'ul_failure_timer' = 0 and 'ul_out_of_sync' = 0. It seems wrong and the UE stays there forever. Let's start an UL out of sync procedure in this case. The root cause of this problem has to be found and corrected. In the meantime, this hack... This has to be redone at some point.
-
Cedric Roux authored
Here is the problem: UE comes. SRB2 is configured via message to RRC. At some point the RLC AM is created but not configured yet. At this moment (I think) MAC calls mac_rlc_status_ind which calls this function. But the init was not finished yet and we have a crash below when testing mem_block != NULL. The "solution" is to test if rlc->input_sdus is NULL. This is a very dirty hack. I would say the solution is to use proper locking mechanism because RLC is used by two threads: PHY/MAC on one hand and RRC on another hand (I think).
-
Cedric Roux authored
-
- 18 Jan, 2017 1 commit
-
-
Cedric Roux authored
The management of uplink failure generates a DCI to send a RA PDCCH order. It calls add_ue_spec_dci which increases DCI_pdu[CC_id]->Num_ue_spec_dci, but this was reset to 0 *after* the DCI generation. Let's reset *before*. Bug reported by Liang Yong on openair5g-user mailing list.
-
- 16 Jan, 2017 3 commits
-
-
Cedric Roux authored
The function may return NULL if the UE has been dropped in the PHY layer but is still present in the MAC layer. Deal with the NULL case everywhere it's needed.
-
Cedric Roux authored
Develop integration w02 See merge request !82
-
Cedric Roux authored
This is the real fix, d5a6817887e720935d9dcc0a6f7d632e85c7d8e5 was not the right solution.
-
- 13 Jan, 2017 8 commits
-
-
Cedric Roux authored
-
Cedric Roux authored
-
Cedric Roux authored
-
Cedric Roux authored
-
Cedric Roux authored
-
Cedric Roux authored
-
Cedric Roux authored
-
Cedric Roux authored
Conflicts: targets/RT/USER/lte-softmodem.c
-
- 12 Jan, 2017 6 commits
-
-
Cedric Roux authored
I am not sure this is the correct solution. The problem seems to be that the RRH GW does not use ITTI and thus the type 'as_nas_info_t' is not defined, and then the compilation fails. The simple fix is to include 'as_message.h' in 'openair2/RRC/LITE/defs.h' if ENABLE_ITTI is not defined. Maybe it's not good. RRH GW compiles with this fix.
-
Cedric Roux authored
"frame" is not defined, we pass 0 instead. Maybe not the right solution.
-
Florian Kaltenberger authored
-
calvin wang authored
-
Cedric Roux authored
It is defined both in openair2/COMMON/commonDef.h and openair2/COMMON/platform_types.h. Removing one or the other definition creates many problems when compiling this or that part of the system (ue_ip.ko, at_nas_ue). Let's keep both and protect the definitions inside #ifdefs.
-
Cedric Roux authored
I'm not sure this is the right fix, so I put a LOG_TRACE that is displayed when the code comes here.
-
- 11 Jan, 2017 5 commits
-
-
Cedric Roux authored
-
Cedric Roux authored
I chose to remove it from common/utils/itti/itti_types.h, maybe it's not the correct solution.
-
Cedric Roux authored
Several various fixes are included. Not sure what component of the system uses this file. There is one 'abort' added in case a fscanf fails. It may be a bit too brutal.
-
Cedric Roux authored
-
Cedric Roux authored
This is not absolutely necessary (the processing is ok), but the warning is annoying.
-