Re: Terminating emergency calls
Denis Kenzior wrote: > Hi Sjur, > I have to verify this with some of my colleagues, but I am pretty sure emergency calls cannot be applied to the AT+CHLD command. i.e. they cannot be part of mpty. >> >> Initial testing on STE modem indicates that emergency call cannot >> participate in multi call or be put on hold. > > What about a somewhat backdoor of putting call on hold on some modems: > If a call is active, and you dial another call, the active call is > automatically put on hold. So if an emergency call is active and we > dial another number, what happens? On the STE modem I get NO CARRIER if I try to put an emergency call on hold this way. fonod[27624]: > ATD911;\r ofonod[27624]: < \r\nOK\r\n ... ofonod[27624]: > ATD+4425993004494;\r ofonod[27624]: < \r\nNO CARRIER\r\n However the other way around works, by having a normal call and then dialing an emergency number puts the regular call on hold. ... >> Yes, you're right using hangup_active will terminate all active calls >> participating in a multi call. >> So my proposal will not work as is. Maybe we need to know if >> release_next was called for multi call? > > I have commited a fix for this that I think should work just fine. Can > you please check bab23b39767b664061ac2bcba747fe2b96561ca7 and let me > know if it solves the issue? Yes, it does. I can now use hangup_all on an emergency call :-) I think this closes the last voice call issue for STE modems (for now). Regards Sjur ___ ofono mailing list ofono@ofono.org http://lists.ofono.org/listinfo/ofono
Re: Terminating emergency calls
Hi Sjur, >>> I have to verify this with some of my colleagues, but I am pretty sure >>> emergency calls cannot be applied to the AT+CHLD command. i.e. they >>> cannot be part of mpty. > > Initial testing on STE modem indicates that emergency call cannot > participate in multi call or be put on hold. What about a somewhat backdoor of putting call on hold on some modems: If a call is active, and you dial another call, the active call is automatically put on hold. So if an emergency call is active and we dial another number, what happens? > >> >> If emergency calls cannot be part of mpty call, we can use either hangup_all >> or >> hangup_active as Denis said. However, your suggested fix will break >> multiparty call >> scenario since multiparty_hangup calls voicecall_release_next as well. > > Yes, you're right using hangup_active will terminate all active calls > participating in a multi call. > So my proposal will not work as is. Maybe we need to know if > release_next was called for multi call? I have commited a fix for this that I think should work just fine. Can you please check bab23b39767b664061ac2bcba747fe2b96561ca7 and let me know if it solves the issue? Regards, -Denis ___ ofono mailing list ofono@ofono.org http://lists.ofono.org/listinfo/ofono
Re: Terminating emergency calls
Zhang, Zhenhua wrote: >> Denis Kenzior wrote: I thought of one more issue with voice calls. I don't think it is safe to to terminate emergency calls using release_specific, AT+CHLD=1X. At least this don't work for STE modems. I suggest calls in state active should be terminated using hangup_all or hangup_active. What do you think? >>> >>> So in the case of a single call, the emergency call will be >>> terminated using hangup_all / hangup_active anyway. I have relaxed >>> the single call restriction for active calls when hangup_active is >>> provided by the >>> driver. Refer to c7b13ec2fe664b122216a312f2442c9ca26f5f43 >> >> Yes, it seems to be ok for voicecall_hangup, but in manager_hangup_all >> the active call is still terminated with release_specific in >> voiceall_release_next. >> This implies that if you have an emergency call and terminate it with >> manager_hangup_all AT+CHLD=1X still will be used, right? >> >> I suggest we change voicecall_release_next like this: >> >> if (vc->driver->hangup_active != NULL && >> (call->call->status == CALL_STATUS_ALERTING || >> call->call->status == CALL_STATUS_DIALING || >> + call->call->status == CALL_STATUS_ACTIVE || >> call->call->status == CALL_STATUS_INCOMING)) >> vc->driver->hangup_active(vc, multirelease_callback, vc); >> else >> vc->driver->release_specific(vc, call->call->id, >> multirelease_callback, vc); >> >>> For mpty calls this gets tricky. I'd like some answers to these >>> questions: >>> >>> - Can Emergency calls participate in mpty? >> >> I have to verify this with some of my colleagues, but I am pretty sure >> emergency calls cannot be applied to the AT+CHLD command. i.e. they >> cannot be part of mpty. Initial testing on STE modem indicates that emergency call cannot participate in multi call or be put on hold. > > If emergency calls cannot be part of mpty call, we can use either hangup_all > or > hangup_active as Denis said. However, your suggested fix will break > multiparty call > scenario since multiparty_hangup calls voicecall_release_next as well. Yes, you're right using hangup_active will terminate all active calls participating in a multi call. So my proposal will not work as is. Maybe we need to know if release_next was called for multi call? >Maybe we > should use call->type to indicate whether it's an emergy call. It looks to me > that the > type flag in struct ofono_call hasn't been used yet. Correct me if I am wrong. Regards Sjur ___ ofono mailing list ofono@ofono.org http://lists.ofono.org/listinfo/ofono
RE: Terminating emergency calls
Hi Sjur, Sjur Br?ndeland wrote: > Denis Kenzior wrote: >>> I thought of one more issue with voice calls. >>> I don't think it is safe to to terminate emergency calls using >>> release_specific, AT+CHLD=1X. At least this don't work for STE >>> modems. >>> >>> I suggest calls in state active should be terminated using >>> hangup_all or hangup_active. What do you think? >> >> So in the case of a single call, the emergency call will be >> terminated using hangup_all / hangup_active anyway. I have relaxed >> the single call restriction for active calls when hangup_active is >> provided by the >> driver. Refer to c7b13ec2fe664b122216a312f2442c9ca26f5f43 > > Yes, it seems to be ok for voicecall_hangup, but in manager_hangup_all > the active call is still terminated with release_specific in > voiceall_release_next. > This implies that if you have an emergency call and terminate it with > manager_hangup_all AT+CHLD=1X still will be used, right? > > I suggest we change voicecall_release_next like this: > > if (vc->driver->hangup_active != NULL && > (call->call->status == CALL_STATUS_ALERTING || > call->call->status == CALL_STATUS_DIALING || > + call->call->status == CALL_STATUS_ACTIVE || > call->call->status == CALL_STATUS_INCOMING)) > vc->driver->hangup_active(vc, multirelease_callback, vc); > else > vc->driver->release_specific(vc, call->call->id, > multirelease_callback, vc); > >> For mpty calls this gets tricky. I'd like some answers to these >> questions: >> >> - Can Emergency calls participate in mpty? > > I have to verify this with some of my colleagues, but I am pretty sure > emergency calls cannot be applied to the AT+CHLD command. i.e. they > cannot be part of mpty. If emergency calls cannot be part of mpty call, we can use either hangup_all or hangup_active as Denis said. However, your suggested fix will break multiparty call scenario since multiparty_hangup calls voicecall_release_next as well. Maybe we should use call->type to indicate whether it's an emergy call. It looks to me that the type flag in struct ofono_call hasn't been used yet. Correct me if I am wrong. > > Regards > Sjur > ___ > ofono mailing list > ofono@ofono.org > http://lists.ofono.org/listinfo/ofono Regards, Zhenhua ___ ofono mailing list ofono@ofono.org http://lists.ofono.org/listinfo/ofono
Re: Terminating emergency calls
Denis Kenzior wrote: >> I thought of one more issue with voice calls. >> I don't think it is safe to to terminate emergency calls using >> release_specific, AT+CHLD=1X. >> At least this don't work for STE modems. >> >> I suggest calls in state active should be terminated using hangup_all >> or hangup_active. >> What do you think? > > So in the case of a single call, the emergency call will be terminated > using hangup_all / hangup_active anyway. I have relaxed the single call > restriction for active calls when hangup_active is provided by the > driver. Refer to c7b13ec2fe664b122216a312f2442c9ca26f5f43 Yes, it seems to be ok for voicecall_hangup, but in manager_hangup_all the active call is still terminated with release_specific in voiceall_release_next. This implies that if you have an emergency call and terminate it with manager_hangup_all AT+CHLD=1X still will be used, right? I suggest we change voicecall_release_next like this: if (vc->driver->hangup_active != NULL && (call->call->status == CALL_STATUS_ALERTING || call->call->status == CALL_STATUS_DIALING || + call->call->status == CALL_STATUS_ACTIVE || call->call->status == CALL_STATUS_INCOMING)) vc->driver->hangup_active(vc, multirelease_callback, vc); else vc->driver->release_specific(vc, call->call->id, multirelease_callback, vc); > For mpty calls this gets tricky. I'd like some answers to these questions: > > - Can Emergency calls participate in mpty? I have to verify this with some of my colleagues, but I am pretty sure emergency calls cannot be applied to the AT+CHLD command. i.e. they cannot be part of mpty. Regards Sjur ___ ofono mailing list ofono@ofono.org http://lists.ofono.org/listinfo/ofono
Re: Terminating emergency calls
Hi Sjur, On 08/12/2010 12:39 PM, Sjur Brændeland wrote: > Hi Denis. > > I thought of one more issue with voice calls. > I don't think it is safe to to terminate emergency calls using > release_specific, AT+CHLD=1X. > At least this don't work for STE modems. > > I suggest calls in state active should be terminated using hangup_all > or hangup_active. > What do you think? So in the case of a single call, the emergency call will be terminated using hangup_all / hangup_active anyway. I have relaxed the single call restriction for active calls when hangup_active is provided by the driver. Refer to c7b13ec2fe664b122216a312f2442c9ca26f5f43 For mpty calls this gets tricky. I'd like some answers to these questions: - Can Emergency calls participate in mpty? - Can Emergency calls be HELD? - How do we recognize Emergency calls? Is simple string matching of numbers in EmergencyNumbers of VoiceCallManager enough? Regards, -Denis ___ ofono mailing list ofono@ofono.org http://lists.ofono.org/listinfo/ofono
Terminating emergency calls
Hi Denis. I thought of one more issue with voice calls. I don't think it is safe to to terminate emergency calls using release_specific, AT+CHLD=1X. At least this don't work for STE modems. I suggest calls in state active should be terminated using hangup_all or hangup_active. What do you think? Regards Sjur ___ ofono mailing list ofono@ofono.org http://lists.ofono.org/listinfo/ofono
