[asterisk-dev] [Code Review] 3254: sorcery: Create AST_SORCERY dialplan function (et. al.)
George Joseph
reviewboard at asterisk.org
Thu Feb 27 15:45:58 CST 2014
> On Feb. 27, 2014, 10:59 a.m., opticron wrote:
> > branches/12/funcs/func_sorcery.c, line 6
> > <https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/3254/diff/1/?file=54393#file54393line6>
> >
> > This might not be correct.
Heh, cut and paste.
> On Feb. 27, 2014, 10:59 a.m., opticron wrote:
> > branches/12/main/sorcery.c, lines 1101-1111
> > <https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/3254/diff/1/?file=54398#file54398line1101>
> >
> > Why not use the newly created ast_variable_list_append() here?
ast_variable_list_append appends the head of one list to the tail of another. It doesn't scan forward to find the new tail, The loop needs to know the new tail though so it can put the next entry in the right place.
- George
-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/3254/#review10971
-----------------------------------------------------------
On Feb. 27, 2014, 2:45 p.m., George Joseph wrote:
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/3254/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
>
> (Updated Feb. 27, 2014, 2:45 p.m.)
>
>
> Review request for Asterisk Developers.
>
>
> Bugs: ASTERISK-22537
> https://issues.asterisk.org/jira/browse/ASTERISK-22537
>
>
> Repository: Asterisk
>
>
> Description
> -------
>
> This patch creates the AST_SORCERY dialplan function which allows someone to retrieve any value from a sorcery-based config file. It's similar to AST_CONFIG.
>
> The creation of the function itself was fairly straightforward but it required changes to the underlying sorcery infrastructure that rippled into individual sorcery objects. The changes stemmed from inconsistencies in how sorcery created ast_variable objectsets from sorcery objects and the inconsistency in how individual objects used that feature especially when it came to parameters that can be specified multiple times like contact in aor and match in identify. You can read more here... http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-dev/2014-February/065202.html
>
> So, what this patch does, besides actually creating the AST_SORCERY function, is the following...
>
> Creates ast_variable_list_append which is a helper to append one ast_variable list to another.
> Modifies the ast_sorcery_object_field_register functions to accept the already-defined sorcery_fields_handler callback.
> Modifies ast_sorcery_objectset_create to accept a parameter indicating return type preference...a single ast_variable with all values concatenated or an ast_variable list with multiple entries. Also fixed a few bugs.
> Modifies individual sorcery object implementations to use the new function definition of the ast_sorcery_object_field_register functions.
> Modifies location.c and res_pjsip_endpoint_identifier_ip.c to implement sorcery_fields_handler handlers so they return multiple occurrences as an ast_variable_list.
> Added a whole bunch of tests to test_sorcery.
>
> NOTES:
>
> If you read through the email chain, I had a question on whether we should/could change "Contacts" to "Contact" in AMI output. Joshua though we should, which I agree with, but there is the issue of backward compatibility. What is did therefore was to put a little translation code in to keep it plural for 12, then if you guys agree, remove that code in trunk/13 so it's singular. I'll have to do a new patch for trunk anyway because ast_sip_auth_array changed to a vector in trunk.
>
>
> Diffs
> -----
>
> branches/12/tests/test_sorcery.c 409132
> branches/12/res/res_pjsip_outbound_registration.c 409132
> branches/12/res/res_pjsip_endpoint_identifier_ip.c 409132
> branches/12/res/res_pjsip_acl.c 409132
> branches/12/res/res_pjsip/pjsip_configuration.c 409132
> branches/12/res/res_pjsip/location.c 409132
> branches/12/res/res_pjsip/config_transport.c 409132
> branches/12/res/res_pjsip/config_auth.c 409132
> branches/12/main/sorcery.c 409132
> branches/12/main/config.c 409132
> branches/12/main/bucket.c 409132
> branches/12/include/asterisk/sorcery.h 409132
> branches/12/include/asterisk/config.h 409132
> branches/12/funcs/func_sorcery.c PRE-CREATION
>
> Diff: https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/3254/diff/
>
>
> Testing
> -------
>
> Created a new test in test_sorcery for the dialplan function which has the side effect of also checking the changes to sorcery for multiple values.
> Ran testsuite tests/channels/pjsip to check sorcery functions and AMI output.
>
> *CLI> test execute category /main/sorcery/
> Running all available tests matching category /main/sorcery/
> START /main/sorcery/ - dialplan_function
> END /main/sorcery/ - dialplan_function Time: <1ms Result: PASS
> START /main/sorcery/ - configuration_file_wizard_retrieve_multiple_all
> <snip>
> 44 Test(s) Executed 44 Passed 0 Failed
>
>
> testsuite$ python -u ./runtests.py -t tests/channels/pjsip | ./pretty_print
> Running tests for Asterisk 12.1.0
> Test Run/Pass/Fail [ Status ]
> tests/channels/pjsip/handle_options_request 1/ 1/ 0 [ Passed ]
> tests/channels/pjsip/incoming_calls_without_auth 2/ 2/ 0 [ Passed ]
> <snip>
> tests/channels/pjsip/ami/show_endpoints 57/ 57/ 0 [ Passed ]
> tests/channels/pjsip/ami/show_endpoint 58/ 58/ 0 [ Passed ]
> tests/channels/pjsip/ami/show_registrations_inbound 59/ 59/ 0 [ Passed ]
> tests/channels/pjsip/ami/show_registrations_outbound 60/ 60/ 0 [ Passed ]
> tests/channels/pjsip/ami/show_subscriptions 61/ 61/ 0 [ Passed ]
> tests/channels/pjsip/set_var 62/ 62/ 0 [ Passed ]
> tests/channels/pjsip/hold/run-test 63/ 62/ 1 [ Failed ]
> tests/channels/pjsip/presence_pidf 64/ 63/ 1 [ Passed ]
> tests/channels/pjsip/presence_xpidf 65/ 64/ 1 [ Passed ]
> tests/channels/pjsip/mwi 66/ 65/ 1 [ Passed ]
> Tests: 66 Passed: 65 Failed: 1
> FAILED: tests/channels/pjsip/hold/run-test
>
> The failed one was failing before any changes. Not sure why.
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> George Joseph
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.digium.com/pipermail/asterisk-dev/attachments/20140227/161bb452/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the asterisk-dev
mailing list