[OpenSIPS-Devel] Can't get 2.3 running with voiptests properly

[Maxim Sobolev]

Bogdan, I've collected some "opensipsctl trap" output here for you, see
line 2611 onwards:

https://travis-ci.org/sippy/voiptests/jobs/261951017

This is 10 seconds after starting the test, CANCELs arrive at about 2-3s
mark, so it's well into "dead zone". Yet, I see some CANCEL messages in the
traces, so it looks like some locking issue indeed.

Please let me know if it helps or if you need any more debug. For the time
being, I am successfully running with 2.3 and master by reverting
change 1eb4ec0f78f43f6ff546de49bc72e513876fb86b

-Max

On Wed, Aug 2, 2017 at 8:03 AM, Bogdan-Andrei Iancu <bogdan at opensips.org>
wrote:

> Thank you Maxim for your troubleshooting.
>
> If you say this code makes a difference in your test, I have the say that
> the newly added locking may do the "blocking" . To see if this is true,
> while OpenSIPS is "blocked" could you run several times the "opensipsctl
> trap" ?
>
> Best regards,
>
> Bogdan-Andrei Iancu
>   OpenSIPS Founder and Developer
>   http://www.opensips-solutions.com
>
> OpenSIPS Bootcamp 2017, Houston, US
>   http://opensips.org/training/OpenSIPS_Bootcamp_2017.html
>
> On 08/02/2017 03:59 AM, Maxim Sobolev wrote:
>
> Hi Bogdan & Co, I think I've narrowed down failure to a specific revision
> in the 2.3 branch, see https://travis-ci.org/sippy/voiptests/builds/
> 260009545:
>
> commit 1eb4ec0f78f43f6ff546de49bc72e513876fb86b
> Author: Bogdan-Andrei Iancu <bogdan at opensips.org>
> Date:   Thu Mar 9 15:37:01 2017 +0200
>
>     Added support for dynamic branch manipulation
>
>     New functions were added to allow remote injecting of new branches
> into an ongoing transaction:
>     * t_inject_branches(source, flags) - injects new branches;
>     * t_wait_for_new_branches() - instruct transaction to wait more for
> possible new injections.
>
> Looking at the diff in question, the following piece of code looks
> suspicious, but it might be something else from that change:
>
> @@ -1244,7 +1301,18 @@ inline static int w_t_relay( struct sip_msg  *p_msg
> , char *proxy, char *flags)
>
>                 update_cloned_msg_from_msg( t->uas.request, p_msg);
>
> -               ret = t_forward_nonack( t, p_msg, p);
> +               if (route_type==FAILURE_ROUTE) {
> +                       /* If called from failure route we need reset the
> branch counter to
> +                        * ignore the previous set of branches (already
> terminated) */
> +                       ret = t_forward_nonack( t, p_msg, p, 1/*reset*/);
> +               } else {
> +                       /* if called from request route and the
> transaction was previously
> +                        * created, better lock here to avoid any
> overlapping with
> +                        * branch injection from other processes */
> +                       LOCK_REPLIES(t);
> +                       ret = t_forward_nonack( t, p_msg, p, 1/*reset*/);
> +                       UNLOCK_REPLIES(t);
> +               }
>                 if (ret<=0 ) {
>                         LM_ERR("t_forward_nonack failed\n");
>                         ret = t_relay_inerr2scripterr();
> @@ -1262,7 +1330,8 @@ route_err:
>
> The revisions right before that work, none after does. Hopefully it will
> give you some clues. Let me know if any other info is needed.
>
> -Max
>
>
>


-- 
Maksym Sobolyev
Sippy Software, Inc.
Internet Telephony (VoIP) Experts
Tel (Canada): +1-778-783-0474
Tel (Toll-Free): +1-855-747-7779
Fax: +1-866-857-6942
Web: http://www.sippysoft.com
MSN: sales at sippysoft.com
Skype: SippySoft
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensips.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20170807/3db5d38f/attachment.html>