yes it is mainly the same
On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 11:28 AM, Joegen Baclor <jbac...@ezuce.com> wrote:
> Domenico,
>
> I committed to 4.6. Would you mind sending a patch for release-4.4 as well?
>
>
> On 11/26/2012 05:25 PM, Domenico Chierico wrote:
>>
>> well I've rewritten the patch against 4.6 this one should apply clearly
>>
>> thanks
>> Domenico Chierico
>>
>> On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 8:11 AM, Joegen Baclor <jbac...@ezuce.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Domenico,
>>>
>>> I've reviewed your patch and I am accepting it for commit. However:
>>>
>>> [joegen@sipdevel sipxecs-master]$ git apply --check
>>> ~/Desktop/fix_sipxclient.patch
>>> error: patch failed: sipXtackLib/src/net/SipClient.cpp:834
>>> error: sipXtackLib/src/net/SipClient.cpp: patch does not apply
>>>
>>>
>>> Can you create a new one against branch release-4.6 ?
>>>
>>> Joegen
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 11/13/2012 10:53 PM, Domenico Chierico wrote:
>>>
>>> Just to simplify tests here is the patch
>>>
>>> On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 3:14 PM, Domenico Chierico
>>> <domenico.chier...@sip2ser.it> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi
>>> We have 1 sipxecs 4.4 with 50 users installed on kvm based virtual
>>> machine.
>>> We had the proxy that ran over 290% of cpu with an average cpu load
>>> close to 95%. Applying the review #22, the stuff start goes better and
>>> we are now close to 40% of cpu load.
>>>
>>> Some of this load come from the known SUBSCRIBE issue, but some others
>>> come from a strange behaviour of the tcp part of the sip stack that we
>>> found:
>>>
>>> - linphone client increases the load on sipXproxy, with his own
>>> strange keepalive method ("Jak" msg to the proxy) and switching the
>>> transport from tcp to udp.
>>>
>>> - Some other evidences come from my personal tests as I notify on 3 of
>>> August on dev-ml.
>>>
>>> Now I'm testing a solution that seems to work, but I wish to know your
>>> opinion. I've change the order of "if" statements into SipClient::run
>>> and I moved the branch about POLLERR and POLLHUP as first.
>>>
>>> On Fri, Aug 3, 2012 at 11:43 AM, Domenico Chierico
>>> <domenico.chier...@sip2ser.it> wrote:
>>>
>>> I'm just playing around with go(lang), and this days I was starting
>>> with sip stack implementation, just when messages starts float around
>>> I'd realize that I've written a DOS for proxy ..
>>> I just send INVITE to the proxy than reads for 100 and 180 and so I
>>> close the socket, at this point I got this into the logs forever:
>>>
>>>
>>> "2012-08-03T09:31:03.817653Z":43810:SIP:DEBUG:testpbx.labsip2ser.net:SipClientTcp-30:22CEF700:SipXProxy:"SipClient[SipClientTcp-30]::run
>>> resPoll= 1 revents: fd[0]= 0 fd[1]= 1d"
>>>
>>> "2012-08-03T09:31:03.817668Z":43811:KERNEL:DEBUG:testpbx.labsip2ser.net:SipClientTcp-30:22CEF700:SipXProxy:"OsSocket::isReadyToWrite
>>> poll returned 1 in socket: 21 0x7f5eec002070"
>>>
>>> "2012-08-03T09:31:03.817683Z":43812:SIP:DEBUG:testpbx.labsip2ser.net:SipClientTcp-30:22CEF700:SipXProxy:"SipClient[SipClientTcp-30]::run
>>> resPoll= 1 revents: fd[0]= 0 fd[1]= 1d"
>>>
>>> "2012-08-03T09:31:03.817698Z":43813:KERNEL:DEBUG:testpbx.labsip2ser.net:SipClientTcp-30:22CEF700:SipXProxy:"OsSocket::isReadyToWrite
>>> poll returned 1 in socket: 21 0x7f5eec002070"
>>>
>>> "2012-08-03T09:31:03.817714Z":43814:SIP:DEBUG:testpbx.labsip2ser.net:SipClientTcp-30:22CEF700:SipXProxy:"SipClient[SipClientTcp-30]::run
>>> resPoll= 1 revents: fd[0]= 0 fd[1]= 1d"
>>>
>>> "2012-08-03T09:31:03.817728Z":43815:KERNEL:DEBUG:testpbx.labsip2ser.net:SipClientTcp-30:22CEF700:SipXProxy:"OsSocket::isReadyToWrite
>>> poll returned 1 in socket: 21 0x7f5eec002070"
>>>
>>> I hope this helps..
>>>
>>> bye
>>> Domenico Chierico
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> sipx-users mailing list
>>> sipx-users@list.sipfoundry.org
>>> List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
>>>
>>>
>
0001-fix-tcp-socket-error-management.patch
Description: Binary data
_______________________________________________ sipx-users mailing list sipx-users@list.sipfoundry.org List Archive: http://list.sipfoundry.org/archive/sipx-users/
