On 05/23/2014 08:17 PM, Matthew Jordan wrote:
>
>
>
> On Sun, May 18, 2014 at 1:57 AM, Petros Moisiadis <[email protected]
> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>
>     On 05/16/2014 04:50 PM, Olle E Johansson wrote:
>>     This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
>>     https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/3546/
>>
>>
>>     Review request for Asterisk Developers.
>>     By Olle E Johansson.
>>     *Repository: * Asterisk
>>
>>
>>       Description
>>
>>     This code in channel.c is wrong. It first checks if we have a length. If 
>> not, we set it to a measured time, which is fine.
>>
>>     If we have a length and it's under the minimum DTMF duration, we set it 
>> again to the measured time. In an RTP session, the duration can be under 
>> minimum, but has no relationship to the measured time between DTMF start and 
>> end. We should keep the given RTP DTMF time and use that for emulation. I 
>> have had DTMF that was extended by up to 60 ms because of this code and that 
>> really, really broke communication for these alarm panels that send many 
>> short DTMF tones.
>>
>>     I suggest that this fix goes into 1.8 and later revisions.
>>
>>
>>       Testing
>>
>>     Hours and hours of reading DTMF logs. Countless cups of tea. A gazillion 
>> milliseconds wasted. All tested in 1.8.
>>
>>
>>       Diffs
>>
>>       * /trunk/main/channel.c (414046)
>>
>>     View Diff <https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/3546/diff/>
>>
>>
>>
>
>     Hello,
>
>     Could this patch help with high cpu usage issue #21872?
>
>
> Highly unlikely. The root cause of that performance problem has not
> really been found, as it has not been reproduced on a consistent basis
> by any bug marshal. This patch - at least so far - is not looking to
> address any performance problems so much as DTMF emulation extending
> digits when it shouldn't.
>
> -- 
> Matthew Jordan
> Digium, Inc. | Engineering Manager
> 445 Jan Davis Drive NW - Huntsville, AL 35806 - USA
> Check us out at: http://digium.com & http://asterisk.org
>
>

Sorry for being off-topic then, but the performance bug can be
consistently reproduced following the steps described at this comment:

https://issues.asterisk.org/jira/browse/ASTERISK-21872?focusedCommentId=211533&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-211533

So, if any developer has already tried these steps but did not manage to
reproduce this, it would be really helpful if he could share his
experience with a post on that issue. Perhaps it is also possible to be
given access to an environment on which this can be reproduced.
-- 
_____________________________________________________________________
-- Bandwidth and Colocation Provided by http://www.api-digital.com --

asterisk-dev mailing list
To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit:
   http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-dev

Reply via email to