Attention is currently required from: daniel, lynxis lazus.

pespin has posted comments on this change by lynxis lazus. ( 
https://gerrit.osmocom.org/c/osmo-ggsn/+/38938?usp=email )

Change subject: gtp: add support for SGSN Context Req/Resp/Ack
......................................................................


Patch Set 18:

(15 comments)

File gtp/gtp.c:

https://gerrit.osmocom.org/c/osmo-ggsn/+/38938/comment/3c656190_1c4b1b4e?usp=email
 :
PS18, Line 400:                    union gtp_packet *packet, int len,
indentation


https://gerrit.osmocom.org/c/osmo-ggsn/+/38938/comment/94d68fac_34b652cd?usp=email
 :
PS18, Line 888:                          const struct sockaddr_in *peer, union 
gtpie_member **ie, size_t ie_size)
the "**ie" contents can be consitfied like you did in a previous patch right?


https://gerrit.osmocom.org/c/osmo-ggsn/+/38938/comment/3300be40_0e35c5ef?usp=email
 :
PS18, Line 894:         union gtpie_member resp_ie_elem[2] = {};
req_ie_elem?


https://gerrit.osmocom.org/c/osmo-ggsn/+/38938/comment/d60eae7c_7036ac66?usp=email
 :
PS18, Line 925:                           union gtpie_member **ie, unsigned int 
ie_size)
constify?


https://gerrit.osmocom.org/c/osmo-ggsn/+/38938/comment/fbaefd92_d60ef6ab?usp=email
 :
PS18, Line 967:         union gtpie_member *ie[GTP_MAX] = {};
why GTP_MAX elements if you are only configuring one below?


https://gerrit.osmocom.org/c/osmo-ggsn/+/38938/comment/2a6a4083_fe8e046b?usp=email
 :
PS18, Line 981:                          union gtpie_member **ie, unsigned int 
ie_size)
constify


https://gerrit.osmocom.org/c/osmo-ggsn/+/38938/comment/0b94a0e4_a2f693e4?usp=email
 :
PS18, Line 1203:        /* FIXME: parse PDP Address */
what about this? afaiu it's done bleow already?


https://gerrit.osmocom.org/c/osmo-ggsn/+/38938/comment/8130bc5b_894a5337?usp=email
 :
PS18, Line 1217:        /* FIXME: check for correct type and length */
what about this?


https://gerrit.osmocom.org/c/osmo-ggsn/+/38938/comment/252ce551_c288d51d?usp=email
 :
PS18, Line 1429:        /* FIXME: retransmission need to be implemented:
afaiu this is already done by gtp_conf()?


File gtp/gtp_sgsn_ctx.h:

https://gerrit.osmocom.org/c/osmo-ggsn/+/38938/comment/5c36c7a1_6a5b549c?usp=email
 :
PS18, Line 25:  /* remote SGSN/MME request a Ctx from this peer */
adding a whitespace line before this one may help understand there are 2 blocks 
of states.


https://gerrit.osmocom.org/c/osmo-ggsn/+/38938/comment/9497cc3c_be53a3c7?usp=email
 :
PS18, Line 36:  SGSN_CTX_REQ_E_RX_REQ,
I'd welcome if you can document here the type of value being passed as a 
parameter for each event expecting one. I find this incredibly useful when 
reading FSMs and making sure everything is fine.


https://gerrit.osmocom.org/c/osmo-ggsn/+/38938/comment/5cbf9afc_2ba1519f?usp=email
 :
PS18, Line 52:  struct llist_head local_reqs;
we'll probably need some sort of hashtable here later on.


https://gerrit.osmocom.org/c/osmo-ggsn/+/38938/comment/892085d1_7fa21a08?usp=email
 :
PS18, Line 67:  struct osmo_fsm_inst *fsm;
can we call this "fi" like virtually everywhere in our code base?


File gtp/gtp_sgsn_ctx.c:

https://gerrit.osmocom.org/c/osmo-ggsn/+/38938/comment/950faa3f_268b016c?usp=email
 :
PS18, Line 325:         llist_del(&req->list);
req is not added to any llist during _alloc(), which means if user calls "req = 
sgsn_ctx_alloc(); sgsn_ctx_free(req);" weird stuff may happen?


https://gerrit.osmocom.org/c/osmo-ggsn/+/38938/comment/9aed7755_f6110f53?usp=email
 :
PS18, Line 439:         /* TODO: move tx GTPv1 into the fsm */
what about this and similar ones below?



--
To view, visit https://gerrit.osmocom.org/c/osmo-ggsn/+/38938?usp=email
To unsubscribe, or for help writing mail filters, visit 
https://gerrit.osmocom.org/settings?usp=email

Gerrit-MessageType: comment
Gerrit-Project: osmo-ggsn
Gerrit-Branch: master
Gerrit-Change-Id: Idb8ed0bb87200a68bb8caedd734fc070df9179c0
Gerrit-Change-Number: 38938
Gerrit-PatchSet: 18
Gerrit-Owner: lynxis lazus <[email protected]>
Gerrit-Reviewer: Jenkins Builder
Gerrit-CC: daniel <[email protected]>
Gerrit-CC: laforge <[email protected]>
Gerrit-CC: pespin <[email protected]>
Gerrit-Attention: daniel <[email protected]>
Gerrit-Attention: lynxis lazus <[email protected]>
Gerrit-Comment-Date: Thu, 05 Jun 2025 12:21:49 +0000
Gerrit-HasComments: Yes
Gerrit-Has-Labels: No

Reply via email to