Attention is currently required from: fixeria, msuraev.
neels has posted comments on this change. ( 
https://gerrit.osmocom.org/c/libosmo-sccp/+/29084 )

Change subject: SIGTRAN: cache Optional Data for SCCP CR/CC/RLSD
......................................................................


Patch Set 14: Code-Review-1

(11 comments)

Patchset:

PS14:
(marked less important comments as resolved, right from the start)


File src/sccp_scoc.c:

https://gerrit.osmocom.org/c/libosmo-sccp/+/29084/comment/d07fbf8a_7ab12466
PS6, Line 583: /* Cache the optional data (if necessary) and return indication 
whether cache was used */
> It would create unnecessary inconvenience for the caller. […]
you are by definition fiddling with the data when dropping the optional data.

ah ok i see, you pass a bool into the encoding function instead of modifying 
the source message. (I think it's a good idea to modify the message to be sent, 
plus some other design choices that could be more clear, but i'm bike-shedding)


https://gerrit.osmocom.org/c/libosmo-sccp/+/29084/comment/e756994a_deca92c8
PS6, Line 1003:                 /* N. B: we've ignored CREF sending errors as 
there's no recovery option anyway */
> Why unrelated? It's certainly worth it to explain why in the above case we 
> use cache while in here w […]
(would be nicer to have a separate patch for adding missing comments)


File src/sccp_scoc.c:

https://gerrit.osmocom.org/c/libosmo-sccp/+/29084/comment/a531d541_42daaa19
PS8, Line 659: break
> Yes?
drop the "break;"


File src/sccp_scoc.c:

https://gerrit.osmocom.org/c/libosmo-sccp/+/29084/comment/3c0f008d_16bdbde9
PS14, Line 594: sua
should this be m3ua? @laforge?


https://gerrit.osmocom.org/c/libosmo-sccp/+/29084/comment/a1bf4766_f1391f10
PS14, Line 653: static bool xua_opt_data_length_lim(struct sccp_connection 
*conn, const struct osmo_scu_prim *prim, int msg_type)
(this function is decribed as checking a length and returning a bool, but there 
is an actual data transmisison triggered in here. It would be good to have a 
clear name and API comment.)


https://gerrit.osmocom.org/c/libosmo-sccp/+/29084/comment/6d7de0c4_b74d1033
PS14, Line 675: There's no need to cache the optional data since the connection 
is still active at this point
(is this comment accurate? i don't understand it...

so the situation here is

   A     B
   ------> DT1
   ------> RLSD

right?

how about "Directly send Optional Data first, if it does not fit in the RLSD 
msg" )


https://gerrit.osmocom.org/c/libosmo-sccp/+/29084/comment/605c6ef9_1a395e16
PS14, Line 713:                 /* optional: importance */
(would be nicer to have a separate patch for adding missing comments)


https://gerrit.osmocom.org/c/libosmo-sccp/+/29084/comment/4b0eab21_2197bd12
PS14, Line 734:                 /* optional: importance */
(would be nicer to have a separate patch for adding missing comments)


https://gerrit.osmocom.org/c/libosmo-sccp/+/29084/comment/efb08c53_8a3dfae9
PS14, Line 789:                 /* optional: importance */
(would be nicer to have a separate patch for adding missing comments)


https://gerrit.osmocom.org/c/libosmo-sccp/+/29084/comment/0b91622a_b0ab061a
PS14, Line 1110:                xua_opt_data_send_cache(conn, SUA_CO_CORE, 
xua->hdr.msg_class);
I think this is mixed up somehow.
This is about too much data in the Connection Request.
It should be:

    A     B
    ------>  Conn Req (cache Optional Data)
    <------  Conn Conf
    ------>  DT1 with cached data

This code here looks like

    A     B
    ------>  Conn Req
    <------  DT1 with cached data (there is no cached data??)
    <------  Conn Conf



--
To view, visit https://gerrit.osmocom.org/c/libosmo-sccp/+/29084
To unsubscribe, or for help writing mail filters, visit 
https://gerrit.osmocom.org/settings

Gerrit-Project: libosmo-sccp
Gerrit-Branch: master
Gerrit-Change-Id: I0033faf9da393418930252233ce74d62cd1cef8a
Gerrit-Change-Number: 29084
Gerrit-PatchSet: 14
Gerrit-Owner: msuraev <msur...@sysmocom.de>
Gerrit-Reviewer: Jenkins Builder
Gerrit-Reviewer: fixeria <vyanits...@sysmocom.de>
Gerrit-Reviewer: laforge <lafo...@osmocom.org>
Gerrit-Reviewer: neels <nhofm...@sysmocom.de>
Gerrit-Attention: fixeria <vyanits...@sysmocom.de>
Gerrit-Attention: msuraev <msur...@sysmocom.de>
Gerrit-Comment-Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2022 23:59:31 +0000
Gerrit-HasComments: Yes
Gerrit-Has-Labels: Yes
Comment-In-Reply-To: neels <nhofm...@sysmocom.de>
Comment-In-Reply-To: fixeria <vyanits...@sysmocom.de>
Comment-In-Reply-To: msuraev <msur...@sysmocom.de>
Gerrit-MessageType: comment

Reply via email to