Re: [PATCH v5 5/6] net: maclorawan: Implement maclorawan class module

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

quoted

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.

Just for clarification:
- Patch "net: lorawan: Add LoRaWAN socket module" is for lorawan module
- Patch "net: lorawan: Add LoRaWAN API declaration for LoRa devices"
containes the header file "include/linux/lora/lorawan.h" which will be
included by LoRa device drivers or other kernel modules.
- Patches "net: maclorawan: Add maclorawan module declaration", "net:
maclorawan: Implement the crypto of maclorawan module" and "net:
maclorawan: Implement maclorawan class module" are for maclorawan
module.

Question 1:
Should I marge "net: maclorawan: Add maclorawan module declaration",
"net: maclorawan: Implement the crypto of maclorawan module" and "net:
maclorawan: Implement maclorawan class module" into a single patch
named "net: maclorawan: Add maclorawan as the soft-MAC module"?

Then:
For example, after a LoRa device driver includes the header
"linux/lora/lorawan.h", the device driver will call "lrw_alloc_hw()"
and pass with a "struct lrw_operations" type of variable's pointer.
It gets a type of "struct lrw_hw *" pointer.  Then, it will call
"lrw_register_hw()" to register the device.  The device driver
implements the callback functions for the "struct lrw_operations" type
of variable by it self before calls "lrw_alloc_hw()".

Question 2:
Should the patch "net: lorawan: Add LoRaWAN API declaration for LoRa
devices" also be merged into "net: maclorawan: Add maclorawan as the
soft-MAC module" or "net: maclorawan: Implement maclorawan class
module"?  Or, just leave it as a single patch?