Harald Welte has submitted this change and it was merged.
Change subject: trans_free: tear down conn when last transaction is done
..
trans_free: tear down conn when last transaction is done
In trans_free(), call subscr_conn_re
Patch Set 3: Code-Review+2
--
To view, visit https://gerrit.osmocom.org/7303
To unsubscribe, visit https://gerrit.osmocom.org/settings
Gerrit-MessageType: comment
Gerrit-Change-Id: I46ff2e9b09b67e4e0d79cccf8c04936f17281fcb
Gerrit-PatchSet: 3
Gerrit-Project: osmo-msc
Gerrit-Branch: master
Gerrit
Patch Set 3:
I still think it makes sense to merge this. Even when I revisit the subscr conn
FSM soon, something similar would have to happen there, and the unit test will
ensure that I get that bit right.
--
To view, visit https://gerrit.osmocom.org/7303
To unsubscribe, visit https://gerrit.
Patch Set 2:
another thought... The main reason why the FSM allocation was separate from the
subscr_conn struct allocation was that in the osmo-nitb, libbsc allocated the
subscr_conn and handed it over to libmsc, and only then were we "allowed" to
start an FSM. That limitation has gone away no
Patch Set 1:
(1 comment)
https://gerrit.osmocom.org/#/c/7303/1/src/libmsc/transaction.c
File src/libmsc/transaction.c:
PS1, Line 155: msc_subscr_conn_put
> What I'm surprised is why the msc_subscr_conn_put() is not sufficient here.
Hmm, might do the subscr_conn_release_when_unused() call in
ms
Patch Set 1: Code-Review+1
(1 comment)
https://gerrit.osmocom.org/#/c/7303/1/src/libmsc/transaction.c
File src/libmsc/transaction.c:
PS1, Line 155: msc_subscr_conn_put
What I'm surprised is why the msc_subscr_conn_put() is not sufficient here. I
have the feeling that we have multiple redundan
Review at https://gerrit.osmocom.org/7303
trans_free: tear down conn when last transaction is done
In trans_free(), call subscr_conn_release_when_unused(), so that we are sure to
clean up after the last transaction is done.
This fixes an error where a conn lingered after a CC failure, because
