| Message ID | 66ff99a1.a70a0220.1fac1d.b37c@mx.google.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| Headers | show |
| Series | mesh: Fix segmentation behavior of Lower transport layer | expand |
Hi, On Fri, Oct 4, 2024 at 3:30 AM Junho Lee <tot0roprog@gmail.com> wrote: > > These is implementations of segmentation and reassembly, except for the > friend feature for LPN nodes, implemented according to Mesh Protocol 1.1 > section 3.5. > > Junho Lee (4): > mesh: Implement lower transport layer for segmentation and reassembly > mesh: Add mesh conf for SAR Transmitter and Receiver > mesh: Fix inserting NULL into bool type arguments to false > mesh: Add features of Segmented Control message > > mesh/crypto.c | 69 ++-- > mesh/mesh-main.conf | 107 ++++++ > mesh/mesh.c | 125 ++++++- > mesh/mesh.h | 2 + > mesh/net.c | 868 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------- > mesh/net.h | 33 +- > 6 files changed, 881 insertions(+), 323 deletions(-) > > -- > 2.34.1 > > Lets see if Brian has some free time to review this set, one thing that might help in the future is if we do some unit testing to cover the testing spec, it is probably a lot of work but I think we add them over time, with that it would be a lot easier to check if something breaks.
Hi, Sorry, resending with a bad cc. On Fri, Oct 04, 2024 at 11:16:16AM -0400, Luiz Augusto von Dentz wrote: > Hi, > > On Fri, Oct 4, 2024 at 3:30 AM Junho Lee <tot0roprog@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > These is implementations of segmentation and reassembly, except for the > > friend feature for LPN nodes, implemented according to Mesh Protocol 1.1 > > section 3.5. > > > > Junho Lee (4): > > mesh: Implement lower transport layer for segmentation and reassembly > > mesh: Add mesh conf for SAR Transmitter and Receiver > > mesh: Fix inserting NULL into bool type arguments to false > > mesh: Add features of Segmented Control message > > > > mesh/crypto.c | 69 ++-- > > mesh/mesh-main.conf | 107 ++++++ > > mesh/mesh.c | 125 ++++++- > > mesh/mesh.h | 2 + > > mesh/net.c | 868 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------- > > mesh/net.h | 33 +- > > 6 files changed, 881 insertions(+), 323 deletions(-) > > > > -- > > 2.34.1 > > > > > > Lets see if Brian has some free time to review this set, one thing > that might help in the future is if we do some unit testing to cover > the testing spec, it is probably a lot of work but I think we add them > over time, with that it would be a lot easier to check if something > breaks. > > -- > Luiz Augusto von Dentz Thanks for your reply. I agree with what you said. If so, what is something I should or can do? I hope this commit can be approved, as the existing code is actually causing performance issues. Regards, Junho Lee
I’m sorry, I was away on holiday until earlier this week. I will review these patches this weekend. > On Oct 6, 2024, at 5:18 PM, Junho Lee <tot0roprog@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi, > > Sorry, resending with a bad cc. > >> On Fri, Oct 04, 2024 at 11:16:16AM -0400, Luiz Augusto von Dentz wrote: >> Hi, >> >>> On Fri, Oct 4, 2024 at 3:30 AM Junho Lee <tot0roprog@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> These is implementations of segmentation and reassembly, except for the >>> friend feature for LPN nodes, implemented according to Mesh Protocol 1.1 >>> section 3.5. >>> >>> Junho Lee (4): >>> mesh: Implement lower transport layer for segmentation and reassembly >>> mesh: Add mesh conf for SAR Transmitter and Receiver >>> mesh: Fix inserting NULL into bool type arguments to false >>> mesh: Add features of Segmented Control message >>> >>> mesh/crypto.c | 69 ++-- >>> mesh/mesh-main.conf | 107 ++++++ >>> mesh/mesh.c | 125 ++++++- >>> mesh/mesh.h | 2 + >>> mesh/net.c | 868 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------- >>> mesh/net.h | 33 +- >>> 6 files changed, 881 insertions(+), 323 deletions(-) >>> >>> -- >>> 2.34.1 >>> >>> >> >> Lets see if Brian has some free time to review this set, one thing >> that might help in the future is if we do some unit testing to cover >> the testing spec, it is probably a lot of work but I think we add them >> over time, with that it would be a lot easier to check if something >> breaks. >> >> -- >> Luiz Augusto von Dentz > > Thanks for your reply. I agree with what you said. If so, what is > something I should or can do? I hope this commit can be approved, > as the existing code is actually causing performance issues. > > Regards, > Junho Lee