On 12/10/09 12:32 PM, Daniel-Constantin Mierla wrote:
Hello,
Andrei, instead of having K compat mode, as global parameter, I would prefer to have per transaction function:
t_lock_onreply()
or have t_on_reply(...) accepting a second parameter that indicates the locking status for onreply_route execution.
Cheers, Daniel
Gives more flexibility.
Cheers, Daniel
On 12/10/09 12:16 PM, Andrei Pelinescu-Onciul wrote:
On Dec 10, 2009 at 12:57, Juha Heinanenjh@tutpro.com wrote:
Andrei Pelinescu-Onciul writes:
What I'm afraid is that executing the reply route under lock might introduce some deadlocks (it is possible that some functions that
are now
allowed to be executed from the onreply route would cause
problems, I
haven't checked all of them).
what could those be? i test/set flags/avps/vars and call functions that rewrite some parts of the message, like contact uri and sdp.
tm functions or functions that use tm api and try to lock replies (lock the transaction reply_lock). I don't know of any and I don't think we'll have any problems, but I haven't checked everything. All the k modules functions that worked in k with the reply avp mode will work with sr too so this leaves possible problems only in modules_s. Everything you mentioned above won't cause any problems.
The long term solution would be to lock only the avps and only
when used,
but it requires lots of changes and testing and I'm not sure it
would be
ready/good enough for 3.0.
not for 3.0, which, in my opinion, we should get out before end of this year.
Yes, I agree.
Andrei
sr-dev mailing list sr-dev@lists.sip-router.org http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-dev