|
Bugzilla – Full Text Bug Listing |
| Summary: | lte-phy-uplink example crashes | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | ns-3 | Reporter: | John Abraham <john.abraham.in> |
| Component: | lte | Assignee: | Nicola Baldo <nicola> |
| Status: | RESOLVED FIXED | ||
| Severity: | major | CC: | ns-bugs, tomh |
| Priority: | P5 | ||
| Version: | pre-release | ||
| Hardware: | All | ||
| OS: | All | ||
|
Description
John Abraham
2012-02-29 09:06:44 UTC
same applies for lte-phy-downlink In lte-helper.cc:
LogComponentEnable ("LtePropagationLossModel", LOG_LEVEL_ALL);
LogComponentEnable ("LossModel", LOG_LEVEL_ALL);
LogComponentEnable ("ShadowingLossModel", LOG_LEVEL_ALL);
LogComponentEnable ("PenetrationLossModel", LOG_LEVEL_ALL);
LogComponentEnable ("MultipathLossModel", LOG_LEVEL_ALL);
LogComponentEnable ("PathLossModel", LOG_LEVEL_ALL);
should be:
LogComponentEnable ("LtePropagationLossModel", LOG_LEVEL_ALL);
LogComponentEnable ("DiscreteTimeLossModel", LOG_LEVEL_ALL); <<----
LogComponentEnable ("ShadowingLossModel", LOG_LEVEL_ALL);
LogComponentEnable ("PenetrationLossModel", LOG_LEVEL_ALL);
LogComponentEnable ("JakesFadingLossModel", LOG_LEVEL_ALL); <<----
LogComponentEnable ("PathLossModel", LOG_LEVEL_ALL);
Mind, it's a best guess. I just grep'ed the NS_LOG_COMPONENT_DEFINE and seen what LOG components are missing and/or called but undefined. 2 are missing and 2 "similar" are not defined, so i guess there was a class renaming.
For completeness, the following components are not activated by the helper function, but they are defined:
src/lte/model/amc-module.cc:NS_LOG_COMPONENT_DEFINE ("AmcModule");
src/lte/model/bearer-qos-parameters.cc:NS_LOG_COMPONENT_DEFINE ("BearerQosParameters");
src/lte/model/channel-realization.cc:NS_LOG_COMPONENT_DEFINE ("ChannelRealization");
src/lte/model/ideal-control-messages.cc:NS_LOG_COMPONENT_DEFINE ("IdealControlMessage");
src/lte/model/lte-mac-header.cc:NS_LOG_COMPONENT_DEFINE ("LteMacHeader");
src/lte/model/lte-spectrum-signal-parameters.cc:NS_LOG_COMPONENT_DEFINE ("LteSpectrumSignalParameters");
I don't know if it was intended or not. Probably yes, so to not have too much spamming from the lower-layer components.
T.
Will be fixed by the LENA LTE code merge when it happens can this be closed now? Fixed by the LENA merge |