dexter has posted comments on this change. ( 
https://gerrit.osmocom.org/c/osmo-mgw/+/24941 )

Change subject: mgcp_protocol: refactor MGCP request handling
......................................................................


Patch Set 4:

(7 comments)

https://gerrit.osmocom.org/c/osmo-mgw/+/24941/1/src/libosmo-mgcp/mgcp_msg.c
File src/libosmo-mgcp/mgcp_msg.c:

https://gerrit.osmocom.org/c/osmo-mgw/+/24941/1/src/libosmo-mgcp/mgcp_msg.c@186
PS1, Line 186:  pdata->trans = "000000";
> why doing this? it could be that trans was parsed correctly? or we don't use 
> it anyway?
It is not used, I have oriented myself on the code that was already there. I 
think the reason why we reset the parameters on failure is historical. In any 
case, if parsing fails we don't care what the trans was and start over. So I 
think its better we remove this part.


https://gerrit.osmocom.org/c/osmo-mgw/+/24941/1/src/libosmo-mgcp/mgcp_protocol.c
File src/libosmo-mgcp/mgcp_protocol.c:

https://gerrit.osmocom.org/c/osmo-mgw/+/24941/1/src/libosmo-mgcp/mgcp_protocol.c@372
PS1, Line 372:          LOGP(DLMGCP, LOGL_ERROR,
> ERROR? that's expected depending on message type right? print this 
> conditionally based on req. […]
I have set the log level to ERROR but you are possibly right, its not an error. 
However, it is an error about to happen...


https://gerrit.osmocom.org/c/osmo-mgw/+/24941/1/src/libosmo-mgcp/mgcp_protocol.c@375
PS1, Line 375:          rate_ctr_inc(rate_ctr_group_get_ctr(rate_ctrs, 
MGCP_GENERAL_RX_FAIL_NO_ENDPOINT));
> Same, this is not necessarily a failure right?
yes and no, if the trunk is not overloaded or the request has a wrong endpoint 
name, then it is definitely an error. If the trunk is overloaded and the 
endpoint name is wild carded, we won't get an endpoint, but a DLCX would still 
be able to execute under those condition. In any case, it is not normal that we 
are able to resolve a trunk without getting an endpoint. If that happens the 
situation is already erroneous and the request handler must somehow recover 
from that (if it can).


https://gerrit.osmocom.org/c/osmo-mgw/+/24941/1/src/libosmo-mgcp/mgcp_protocol.c@386
PS1, Line 386:          rq.mgcp_cause = rc;
> rc is always 0 here?
in this case not 0, it still contains the cause code from mgcp_endp_by_name(). 
I have reorganized the code a bit so that it stores rc earlier in 
rq.mgcp_cause. Its probably more clear then.


https://gerrit.osmocom.org/c/osmo-mgw/+/24941/1/src/libosmo-mgcp/mgcp_protocol.c@392
PS1, Line 392:          if (pdata.trans && rq.endp->last_trans && 
strcmp(rq.endp->last_trans, pdata.trans) == 0) {
> so transactions without endpoint cannot be repeated? because they are under 
> the "rq. […]
that is correct. Its also so that the repetition only makes sense when a 
specific endpoint is addressed. For wild carded requests this feature is of 
minor importance I think. This is probably a quirk, however the only solution 
would be to manage the transactions in a different location. Or search all 
endpoints for that specific transaction ID. In any case, this would be a 
different topic/patch anyway.


https://gerrit.osmocom.org/c/osmo-mgw/+/24941/1/src/libosmo-mgcp/mgcp_protocol.c@400
PS1, Line 400:          if (strncmp(mgcp_requests[i].name, rq.name, 4) == 0) {
> what about having "name" field be a char[4+1] and copy the first bytes of 
> msgb in there? Looks more  […]
Done


https://gerrit.osmocom.org/c/osmo-mgw/+/24941/1/src/libosmo-mgcp/mgcp_protocol.c@413
PS1, Line 413:                               "%s: executing request handler 
\"%s\" for endpoint resource \"%s\"\n", rq.name,
> NOTICE here looks a level too high. […]
Done



--
To view, visit https://gerrit.osmocom.org/c/osmo-mgw/+/24941
To unsubscribe, or for help writing mail filters, visit 
https://gerrit.osmocom.org/settings

Gerrit-Project: osmo-mgw
Gerrit-Branch: master
Gerrit-Change-Id: I9f519d8a0ee8a513fa1e74acf3ee7dbc0991cdde
Gerrit-Change-Number: 24941
Gerrit-PatchSet: 4
Gerrit-Owner: dexter <pma...@sysmocom.de>
Gerrit-Reviewer: Jenkins Builder
Gerrit-CC: pespin <pes...@sysmocom.de>
Gerrit-Comment-Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2021 08:10:52 +0000
Gerrit-HasComments: Yes
Gerrit-Has-Labels: No
Comment-In-Reply-To: pespin <pes...@sysmocom.de>
Gerrit-MessageType: comment

Reply via email to