BSSGP: do not reject SUSPEND ACK / NACK messages
Both BSSGP SUSPEND ACK and NACK messages use BVCI=0 (signaling), which always exists. Claiming that BVCI=0 is unknown is wrong. Instead of adding both BSSGP_PDUT_SUSPEND_{ACK,NACK} to the 'if' statement, let's rather avoid rejection for all BVCI=0 messages, as there may be other unlisted message types. Change-Id: I780657c1e8f67e0bef0e92a31db7ba61b57d7ec4 Related: OS#4111
This commit is contained in:
parent
05bca3524a
commit
ef444142c8
|
@ -407,10 +407,7 @@ static int gprs_bssgp_pcu_rcvmsg(struct msgb *msg)
|
|||
/* look-up or create the BTS context for this BVC */
|
||||
bctx = btsctx_by_bvci_nsei(ns_bvci, msgb_nsei(msg));
|
||||
|
||||
if (!bctx
|
||||
&& pdu_type != BSSGP_PDUT_BVC_RESET_ACK
|
||||
&& pdu_type != BSSGP_PDUT_BVC_UNBLOCK_ACK
|
||||
&& pdu_type != BSSGP_PDUT_PAGING_PS)
|
||||
if (!bctx && ns_bvci != BVCI_SIGNALLING)
|
||||
{
|
||||
LOGP(DBSSGP, LOGL_NOTICE, "NSEI=%u/BVCI=%u Rejecting PDU type %s for unknown BVCI\n",
|
||||
nsei, ns_bvci, bssgp_pdu_str(pdu_type));
|
||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue