Bug 1035

Summary: wimax-simple asserts after 10 seconds duration
Product: ns-3 Reporter: Tom Henderson <tomh>
Component: wimaxAssignee: Flavio Kubota <kubota>
Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE    
Severity: normal CC: david.rua, ns-bugs
Priority: P3    
Version: ns-3-dev   
Hardware: All   
OS: All   

Description Tom Henderson 2010-11-29 18:42:09 UTC 
./waf --run "wimax-simple --duration=10"

results in:

TraceDelay TX 1024 bytes to 10.1.1.1 Uid: 11599 Time: 6
TraceDelay TX 1024 bytes to 10.1.1.1 Uid: 12552 Time: 6.5
TraceDelay TX 1024 bytes to 10.1.1.1 Uid: 13582 Time: 7
TraceDelay TX 1024 bytes to 10.1.1.1 Uid: 14528 Time: 7.5
TraceDelay TX 1024 bytes to 10.1.1.1 Uid: 15530 Time: 8
TraceDelay TX 1024 bytes to 10.1.1.1 Uid: 16441 Time: 8.5
TraceDelay TX 1024 bytes to 10.1.1.1 Uid: 17422 Time: 9
TraceDelay TX 1024 bytes to 10.1.1.1 Uid: 18389 Time: 9.5
assert failed. cond="m_state == PHY_STATE_IDLE || m_state == PHY_STATE_SCANNING", msg="Error while scanning: The PHY state should be PHY_STATE_SCANNING or PHY_STATE_IDLE", file=../src/devices/wimax/wimax-phy.cc, line=130
terminate called without an active exception
Comment 1 Tom Henderson 2010-11-30 01:08:10 UTC 
Some clues from Kwong-Sang Yin:

.in SSLinkManager::StartSynchronizing, StartScanning is schedule to kick in at  m_ss->GetIntervalT21 () secs which is set to 10secs and then it crashes since its already in PHY_STATE_RX .   Commenting out these lines in StartSynchronization clears the problem.

m_ss->SetTimer (Simulator::Schedule (m_ss->GetIntervalT21 (),
                                       &SSLinkManager::StartScanning, this,
                                       SubscriberStationNetDevice::EVENT_DL_MAP_SYNC_TIMEOUT, false),
                  m_dlMapSyncTimeoutEvent);
Comment 2 David 2010-11-30 07:53:50 UTC 
I've also encountered this issue and I implemented the fix solution proposed by José Francisco Lombera in http://www.nsnam.org/bugzilla/﷒0﷓
and this was solved.

Please see his description of the solution.

David
Comment 3 Tom Henderson 2010-11-30 11:06:05 UTC 
(In reply to comment #2)
> I've also encountered this issue and I implemented the fix solution proposed by
> José Francisco Lombera in http://www.nsnam.org/bugzilla/﷒0﷓
> and this was solved.
> 
> Please see his description of the solution.
> 
> David

I confirmed that the patch to 985 also solves this problem.  Will try to get it approved for merging.

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 985 ***