Tue, Dec 18, 2018 at 03:27:09PM CET, starnight@g.ncu.edu.tw wrote:

quoted

Sun, Dec 16, 2018 at 11:18:59AM CET, starnight@g.ncu.edu.tw wrote:

quoted

LoRaWAN defined by LoRa Alliance(TM) is the MAC layer over LoRa devices.

This patch implements part of Class A end-devices SoftMAC defined in
LoRaWAN(TM) Specification Ver. 1.0.2:
1. End-device receive slot timing
2. Only single channel and single data rate for now
3. Unconfirmed data up/down message types

On the other side, it defines the basic interface and operation
functions for compatible LoRa device drivers.

Signed-off-by: Jian-Hong Pan <redacted>
---
V2:
- Split the LoRaWAN class module patch in V1 into LoRaWAN socket and
 LoRaWAN Soft MAC modules
- Modify for Big/Little-Endian
- Use SPDX license identifiers

V3:
- Remove the decoration word - inline of the functions
- Order local variables from longest to shortest line in the functions
- Change the calling mac_cb function to lrw_get_mac_cb macro

V4:
- Fix the delay period between RX window#1 and window#2
- Fix by coding style report from scripts/checkpatch.pl

V5:
- Initial rx_skb_list when it is allocated with LoRa hardware
- Check the sk_buff's data length before access it
- Deal FPort field and decrypt payload in lrw_parse_frame function
- Drop the recieved frame if parse failed
- Fix the bug which passes wrong skb properties from maclorawan to lorawan module

net/maclorawan/Kconfig  |  14 +
net/maclorawan/Makefile |   2 +
net/maclorawan/mac.c    | 555 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
net/maclorawan/main.c   | 606 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
4 files changed, 1177 insertions(+)
create mode 100644 net/maclorawan/Kconfig
create mode 100644 net/maclorawan/Makefile
create mode 100644 net/maclorawan/mac.c
create mode 100644 net/maclorawan/main.c

I don't get it. In patch "Add LoRaWAN API declaration for LoRa devices"
you add headers for "API" and here you implement functions. That is just
weird. Does it mean you can have other implementations?

LoRaWAN defined by LoRa Alliance(TM) is the MAC layer over LoRa PHY.
This part is soft-MAC as Andreas mentioned
http://lists.infradead.org/pipermail/linux-lpwan/2018-December/000010.html

Okay, that does not answer my concern about header file in one patch and
the actual implementation of functions in another one.

quoted

Also, you don't really have any user of this API in the set. Please
introduce at least 1 driver, preferably more (I see that Andreas has
multiple ones in his patchset). You cannot push kernel infrastructure
without kernel user.

The soft-MAC is suitable for the LoRa chips' device drivers, like
sx1276/77/78/79, RFM95/96/97/98W ...
Still waiting for Andreas' sx1276 version 2 patch and more discussion.
For example, how to make PF_LORA and PF_LORAWAN like Ethernet, PF_INET
and PF_INET6 don't need separate devices either, both use eth0.
https://lkml.org/lkml/2018/8/3/266

Then you should push this is RFC or together with Andreases work in a
single patchset. Infra without users cannot be merged.

Jian-Hong Pan

_______________________________________________
linux-arm-kernel mailing list
linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-arm-kernel