From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============6649629278848157248==" MIME-Version: 1.0 From: Denis Kenzior Subject: Re: Terminating emergency calls Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2010 14:05:51 -0500 Message-ID: <4C65978F.4000601@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: List-Id: To: ofono@ofono.org --===============6649629278848157248== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi Sjur, >>> I have to verify this with some of my colleagues, but I am pretty sure >>> emergency calls cannot be applied to the AT+CHLD command. i.e. they >>> cannot be part of mpty. > = > Initial testing on STE modem indicates that emergency call cannot > participate in multi call or be put on hold. What about a somewhat backdoor of putting call on hold on some modems: If a call is active, and you dial another call, the active call is automatically put on hold. So if an emergency call is active and we dial another number, what happens? > = >> >> If emergency calls cannot be part of mpty call, we can use either hangup= _all or >> hangup_active as Denis said. However, your suggested fix will break mult= iparty call >> scenario since multiparty_hangup calls voicecall_release_next as well. > = > Yes, you're right using hangup_active will terminate all active calls > participating in a multi call. > So my proposal will not work as is. Maybe we need to know if > release_next was called for multi call? I have commited a fix for this that I think should work just fine. Can you please check bab23b39767b664061ac2bcba747fe2b96561ca7 and let me know if it solves the issue? Regards, -Denis --===============6649629278848157248==--