[asterisk-dev] [Code Review] Add parking extension for non-default parking lots

[Russell Bryant]

-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/884/#review2726
-----------------------------------------------------------



/trunk/main/features.c
<https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/884/#comment5895>

    should probably be AST_MAX_EXTENSION



/trunk/main/features.c
<https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/884/#comment5896>

    I know ast_get_extension_app() is okay with a NULL argument, but I had to look at the implementation to find that out.  I'd rather see a NULL check on exten before this.



/trunk/main/features.c
<https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/884/#comment5897>

    red spots of evilness



/trunk/main/features.c
<https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/884/#comment5899>

    just make this:
    
    struct ast_park_call_args args = {
        .parkinglot = parkinglot,
    };



/trunk/main/features.c
<https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/884/#comment5900>

    You've got a memory leak here.  The reference from the iterator is not being released.
    
    As a more general comment, I'm not a huge fan to this approach to handling reloads.  By deleting everything and then creating everything again from the config, there is a period of time where no parking lots exist.  I would rather see a different approach taken which other modules use.  It is, in short:
    
    1) Mark all objects.
    2) Load config, if an object already exists that is in the config, unmark it.
    3) Destroy all objects still marked.


- Russell


On 2010-09-13 17:19:50, Jeff Peeler wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/884/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated 2010-09-13 17:19:50)
> 
> 
> Review request for Asterisk Developers.
> 
> 
> Summary
> -------
> 
> I think the summary says all here, this was just something that wasn't implemented when multiparking was added.
> 
> 
> This addresses bug 14882.
>     https://issues.asterisk.org/view.php?id=14882
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   /trunk/CHANGES 286497 
>   /trunk/channels/chan_dahdi.c 286497 
>   /trunk/channels/chan_iax2.c 286497 
>   /trunk/channels/chan_mgcp.c 286497 
>   /trunk/channels/chan_sip.c 286497 
>   /trunk/channels/sig_analog.c 286497 
>   /trunk/channels/sip/include/sip.h 286497 
>   /trunk/configs/features.conf.sample 286497 
>   /trunk/include/asterisk/features.h 286497 
>   /trunk/main/features.c 286497 
> 
> Diff: https://reviewboard.asterisk.org/r/884/diff
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> I tested as I went and ran all of our parking tests.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Jeff
> 
>