Hello,
some comments inline.
On 6/14/13 2:03 PM, Halina Nowak wrote:
Proposal for cseq:
cseq numbering:
--- a/modules/dialog/dlg_handlers.c Wed Apr 03 13:33:38 2013
+0200
+++ b/modules/dialog/dlg_handlers.c Fri Jun 14 13:39:47 2013
+0200
@@ -220,7 +220,7 @@
cseq = (get_cseq(msg))->number;
} else {
/* use the same as in request */
- cseq = dlg->cseq[DLG_CALLER_LEG];
+ cseq = dlg->cseq[DLG_CALLEE_LEG];
at quick check, the comment says the cseq is taken
from the request because it is processing the reply in this part
of the code.
You change that to take the value of the stored cseq for callee,
which is different than the current processed message.
What was the problem you discovered? Can you give an example to
understand this change?
}
avoid memory leak:
--- a/modules/dialog/dlg_hash.c Fri Jun 14 13:40:12 2013
+0200
+++ b/modules/dialog/dlg_hash.c Fri Jun 14 13:45:21 2013
+0200
@@ -485,7 +485,14 @@
char *p;
dlg->tag[leg].s = (char*)shm_malloc( tag->len +
rr->len + contact->len );
- dlg->cseq[leg].s = (char*)shm_malloc( cseq->len );
+ if(dlg->cseq[leg].s){
+ if (dlg->cseq[leg].len < cseq->len) {
+ shm_free(dlg->cseq[leg].s);
+ dlg->cseq[leg].s = (char*)shm_malloc(cseq->len);
+ }
+ }else{
+ dlg->cseq[leg].s = (char*)shm_malloc( cseq->len );
+ }
if ( dlg->tag[leg].s==NULL || dlg->cseq[leg].s==NULL)
{
LM_ERR("no more shm mem\n");
if (dlg->tag[leg].s)
I see tag is also allocated each time, isn't it exposed to same
issue? You changed only cseq to reuse existing buffer or free the
old one and allocate a bigger one when needed.
Cheers,
Daniel
--
Daniel-Constantin Mierla - http://www.asipto.com
http://twitter.com/#!/miconda - http://www.linkedin.com/in/miconda