Subject: RE: [rohc] Memory management in state handle

From: "Lajos Zaccomer (IJ/ETH)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 24 May 2004 08:02:59 +0200

Hi Suman,

This is what should happen:

states in the order of automatic removal:
state 1: 256 + 64 = 320
state 2: 512 + 64 = 576
state 3: 512 + 64 = 576
total (1472, free mem: 576)

save: 1536 + 64 = 1600
not enough memory, free state 1 -> free mem = 576 + 320 = 896
not enough memory, free state 2 -> free mem = 896 + 576 = 1472
not enough memory, free state 3 (empty SM) -> free mem = 2048
enough memory, save new state

In brief, case 1 is right.

BR/Zacco

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]]On Behalf Of suman
Sent: Sunday, May 23, 2004 10:09 AM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: [rohc] Memory management in state handle

Hi,

the rules specified in 3320 for memory management in state handler seems a
bit confusing to me..

   Consider a scenario where a compartment has an allocated sms of 2048
bytes.
Currently there are 3 states with the following sizes.

state 1: (length -256 bytes), (state retention priority 65535)
state 2: (length -512 bytes), (state retention priority 1)
state 3: (length -512 bytes), (state retention priority 4)

Now if a new state create request is received whose length is 1536 bytes,
and
its state retention priority is 3, what is the expected result ??

case1: Delete  the states with priority 65535, 1, 2, and 4 to accomodate the
new state.

case 2: Delete only the states with priority 65535, 1 and 2 and check if the
memory
accomodates the new state creation request. if so, accept the STATE-CREATE
request,
else reject it.

which of the above two is the correct answer ??

please confirm,

thanks
suman

_______________________________________________
Rohc mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rohc

_______________________________________________
Rohc mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/rohc