From 8206f20f8943d52a597a7b4fb74e1f2c86fb878f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Neels Hofmeyr <neels@hofmeyr.de>
Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2018 18:08:05 +0200
Subject: move init from gsm_bts_alloc_register() to gsm_bts_alloc(); fix
 gsm0408_test

gsm_bts_alloc() ought to do all static initialization, so that e.g. unit tests
can use an initialized bts struct that is fully usable, just not registered at
the gsm_network.

For example, two INIT_LLIST_HEAD() and various system information data pointers
(pointing to proper places within the same bts struct) should definitely never
be omitted.

This fixes the remaining errors of gsm0408_test's SI tests, as revealed by a
sanitizer build using gcc (Debian 7.3.0-12) 7.3.0.

Fixes:

  ../../../../src/osmo-bsc/src/libbsc/system_information.c:613:3: runtime error: null pointer passed as argument 1, which is declared to never be null

Initializing the bts->si_common.rach_control results in different expected
bytes for SI2. The initialized values are

  bts->si_common.rach_control.re = 1; /* no re-establishment */
  bts->si_common.rach_control.tx_integer = 9;  /* 12 slots spread - 217/115 slots delay */
  bts->si_common.rach_control.max_trans = 3; /* 7 retransmissions */
  bts->si_common.rach_control.t2 = 4; /* no emergency calls */

Causing a change to e5 04. 04 is t2 = 4, and the remaining values are verified by:

  uint8_t re :1,
           cell_bar :1,
           tx_integer :4,
           max_trans :2;

  >>> hex(1 + (9 << 2) + (3 << 6))
  '0xe5'

Change-Id: I13ef24bbe0f1fbe49465e67a0b67d6fd69fff3b1
---
 tests/gsm0408/gsm0408_test.ok | 4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

(limited to 'tests/gsm0408')

diff --git a/tests/gsm0408/gsm0408_test.ok b/tests/gsm0408/gsm0408_test.ok
index 6bb1140a5..727072137 100644
--- a/tests/gsm0408/gsm0408_test.ok
+++ b/tests/gsm0408/gsm0408_test.ok
@@ -212,8 +212,8 @@ generated valid SI2quater [05/05]: [23] 59 06 07 4a a0 04 86 59 84 26 53 97 65 6
 BTS deallocated OK in test_si2q_long()
 BTS allocation OK in test_si_ba_ind()
 Testing if BA-IND is set as expected in SI2xxx and SI5xxx
-SI2: 59 06 1a 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 
-SI2bis: 59 06 02 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 2b 
+SI2: 59 06 1a 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 e5 04 00 
+SI2bis: 59 06 02 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 e5 04 00 2b 
 SI2ter: 59 06 03 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 2b 2b 2b 2b 
 SI5: 06 1d 10 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 
 SI5bis: 06 05 10 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 
-- 
cgit v1.2.3