On Dec 10, 2009 at 12:57, Juha Heinanen <[email protected]> wrote: > Andrei Pelinescu-Onciul writes: > > > What I'm afraid is that executing the reply route under lock might > > introduce some deadlocks (it is possible that some functions that are now > > allowed to be executed from the onreply route would cause problems, I > > haven't checked all of them). > > what could those be? i test/set flags/avps/vars and call functions that > rewrite some parts of the message, like contact uri and sdp.
tm functions or functions that use tm api and try to lock replies (lock the transaction reply_lock). I don't know of any and I don't think we'll have any problems, but I haven't checked everything. All the k modules functions that worked in k with the reply avp mode will work with sr too so this leaves possible problems only in modules_s. Everything you mentioned above won't cause any problems. > > > The long term solution would be to lock only the avps and only when used, > > but it requires lots of changes and testing and I'm not sure it would be > > ready/good enough for 3.0. > > not for 3.0, which, in my opinion, we should get out before end of this > year. Yes, I agree. Andrei _______________________________________________ sr-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.sip-router.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sr-dev
