Age | Commit message (Collapse) | Author | Files | Lines |
|
Currently the PCU silently discard LLC frames from the SGSN if a
DL TBF cannot be allocated.
This commit changes tbf_new_dl_assignment and reuse_tbf to send an
LLC discarded message to the SGSN in this case.
Ticket: #607
Sponsored-by: On-Waves ehf
|
|
This test calls gprs_rlcmac_dl_tbf::handle() with varying TLLI and
IMSI until the function fails.
Sponsored-by: On-Waves ehf
|
|
If an MS wants to open a new UL TBF, it can either use (P)RACH or
request one in a Ack/Nack message for a DL TBF (PACCH). When a TBF
becomes idle (LCC queue is empty but the TBF is kept open), there
aren't any Ack/Nack requests that can be used by the MS to ask for an
UL TBF, therefore it has to use the RACH. This leads to many RACH
requests even for a single HTTP transaction, so it takes some time to
retrieve even a simple web page.
This commit modifies the scheduler to regularly send Ack/Nack
requests on idle DL TBFs. It does so by extending the priority based
scheduling algorithm to have 5 priority levels (highest priority
first):
- Control block is pending
- High age (100%) threshold reached (-> request Ack/Nack)
- Data is waiting or there are pending Nacks
- Low age (200ms) threshold reached (-> request Ack/Nack)
- Pending Nacks that have been resent already
- None of the above (-> send DL dummy control block)
The 'age' refers to the time since since the last control block has
been sent on the TBF. This high age threshold is set to
dl-tbf-idle-time or to 50% of T3190 (whichever is smaller), aiming
for at least a poll (and TBF shutdown) after the TBF has expired and
to safely prevent expiry of T3190. So if dl-tbf-idle-time > 200ms,
there will be a poll every 200ms and a final poll after
dl-tbf-idle-time. On high load, the interval between polls can get
higher, but the 'high age' poll should be in place.
This commit implements the scheduling with respect to GSM 44.060,
9.3.1a ("Delayed release of downlink TBF").
Ticket: #556
Sponsored-by: On-Waves ehf
|
|
This tests checks the implementation of the delayed release of an
downlink TBF.
Ticket: #556
Sponsored-by: On-Waves ehf
|
|
Currently if append_data() is used when there is no LLC data in the DL TBF,
it will either call reuse_tbf() which in turn will call put_frame(),
or it will append the LLC message to the queue, even if the queue and
the frame buffer are empty. This only happens with the test case so
far, but this would change when idle DL TBFs are kept open for some
time. It results in empty LLC message being sent to the MS (see log
below).
This commit changes append_data to check for this case and to
eventually use put_frame() instead of appending the LLC data to the
queue.
Addresses:
TBF(TFI=0 TLLI=0x00000000 DIR=DL STATE=FLOW) downlink (V(A)==0 ..
V(S)==0)
- Sending new block at BSN 0
-- Chunk with length 0 is less than remaining space (20): add length
header to to delimit LLC frame
Complete DL frame for TBF(TFI=0 TLLI=0x00000000 DIR=DL STATE=FLOW)len=0
- Dequeue next LLC for TBF(TFI=0 TLLI=0x00000000 DIR=DL STATE=FLOW)
(len=200)
Sponsored-by: On-Waves ehf
|
|
Currently fn and block_nr are not incremented correctly. In addition,
the comments around the sending of blocks are not accurate either.
This commit introduces the send_rlc_block helper function which takes
care of the increments, updates the comments to reflect what is
really happening, and adds assertion to verify at least some aspects
of what is now stated in the comments.
Sponsored-by: On-Waves ehf
|
|
Put the generic parts of test_tbf_final_ack into helper functions to
reduce the size of the test and to avoid too much code duplication
when creating new tests.
Sponsored-by: On-Waves ehf
|
|
Currently tbf->m_new_tbf may point to itself if no new TBF is
assigned. But this leads to additional logging messages, since the
code in set_new_tbf and tbf_free assumes, that a real new TBF is
assigned and generates log messages accordingly.
This commit adds checks to avoid those messages in the above case.
Sponsored-by: On-Waves ehf
|
|
Currently tbf_name() must not be used twice in a printf statement
with different TBFs, since the same baffer will be used for each.
This commit puts the text buffer into struct gprs_rlcmac_tbf to avoid
this problem.
Sponsored-by: On-Waves ehf
|
|
Currently if a 'new' TBF is freed before the 'old' one (where
old_tbf->m_new_tbf == new_tbf), the old_tbf->m_new_tbf is not cleared
and can be accessed later on. This can lead to inconsistencies or
segmentation faults.
This commit adds m_old_tbf which points back from new_tbf to old_pdf.
m_new_tbf and m_old_tbf are either both set to NULL or one is the
reverse pointer of the other (tbf->m_new_tbf->m_old_tbf == tbf and
tbf->m_old_tbf->m_new_tbf == tbf). It extends set_new_tbf and
tbf_free to update the pointee accordingly.
The TBF test is extended to check this invariant at several places.
Sponsored-by: On-Waves ehf
|
|
When new_tbf is freed before dl_tbf in test_tbf_final_ack, dl_tbf
still contains a pointer to it in m_new_tbf.
This patch changes the test to accept a test mode parameter and runs
it twice which a different order of tbf_free in each run. Consistency
checks are added, to check for a danglilng m_new_tbf pointer in both
cases.
Sponsored-by: On-Waves ehf
|
|
Otherwise the diff and hence the test will fail...
|
|
The test called the llc enqueue() function directly which didn't take
care of prepending the tv values for the timeout to the data.
Now the test uses dl_tbf.append() which takes care of prepending the tv
values. With this patch make distcheck on jenkins should no longer fail
with "Discarding LLC PDU because lifetime limit reached." messages.
|
|
Ticket: SYS#382
Sponsored-by: On-Waves ehf
|
|
Sponsored-by: On-Waves ehf
|
|
Sponsored-by: On-Waves ehf
|
|
UL and DL tbfs are used in very separate parts and are not the same
thing so split the alloc function and use the UL/DL version throughout
the code.
Ticket: SYS#389
Sponsored-by: On-Waves ehf
|
|
In the future we want to separate ul and dl tbf into different
classes that inherit from a common base.
Ticket: SYS#389
Sponsored-by: On-Waves ehf
|
|
|
|
During a routing area update a new P-TMSI was assigned. During
the PACKET CONTROL ACK on the DL we notice the change of TLLI
but didn't propagate this. This means that a Routing Area Update
Complete was only sent after a new RACH request.
Addresses:
<0007> gprs_rlcmac_meas.cpp:103 UL RSSI of TLLI=0x88661bc6: -67 dBm
<0002> bts.cpp:945 Got ACK, but UL TBF is gone TLLI=0xe512eba3
<0007> gprs_rlcmac_meas.cpp:158 DL packet loss of IMSI=274080000004765 / TLLI=0xe512eba3: 0%
<0002> tbf.cpp:668 TBF TFI=0 TLLI=0x88661bc6 T3169 timeout during transsmission
<0002> tbf.cpp:690 - Assignment was on PACCH
<0002> tbf.cpp:694 - No uplink data received yet
|