[PATCH] stk: Additional info for failed Send USSD case

[PATCH] stk: Additional info for failed Send USSD case

[Jeevaka Badrappan]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1015 bytes --]

---
 src/stk.c |    9 ++++++++-
 1 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)

diff --git a/src/stk.c b/src/stk.c
index bbbc4fd..80b4d23 100644
--- a/src/stk.c
+++ b/src/stk.c
@@ -1621,6 +1621,7 @@ static void send_ussd_callback(int error, int dcs, const unsigned char *msg,
 	struct ofono_error failure = { .type = OFONO_ERROR_TYPE_FAILURE };
 	struct stk_response rsp;
 	enum sms_charset charset;
+	unsigned char no_cause[] = { 0x00 };
 
 	if (stk->pending_cmd->send_ussd.alpha_id &&
 			stk->pending_cmd->send_ussd.alpha_id[0])
@@ -1661,7 +1662,13 @@ static void send_ussd_callback(int error, int dcs, const unsigned char *msg,
 		break;
 
 	default:
-		send_simple_response(stk, STK_RESULT_TYPE_USSD_RETURN_ERROR);
+		rsp.result.type = STK_RESULT_TYPE_USSD_RETURN_ERROR;
+		rsp.result.additional_len = sizeof(no_cause);
+		rsp.result.additional = no_cause;
+
+		if (stk_respond(stk, &rsp, stk_command_cb))
+			stk_command_cb(&failure, stk);
+
 		break;
 	}
 }
-- 
1.7.0.4

Re: [PATCH] stk: Additional info for failed Send USSD case

[Denis Kenzior]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 220 bytes --]

Hi Jeevaka,

On 10/01/2010 01:32 AM, Jeevaka Badrappan wrote:
> ---
>  src/stk.c |    9 ++++++++-
>  1 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> 

This patch has been applied, thanks.

Regards,
-Denis

Additional info for failed SAT-Send USSD case

[Jeevaka Badrappan]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 484 bytes --]

Hi,

 Following patch handles the SAT initiated Send USSD failure case. 
As per the 3GPP 31.111 specification section 6.4.12, when a SAT initiated 
Send USSD fails, error code from the network should be sent as 
additional information(part of Result data). If no additional information
can be sent, then 0( No specific cause can be given) should be sent.

 Due to the current limitations, this patch sends "No Specific cause can be 
givent" to the SAT.

Regards,
jeevaka

[PATCH] stk: Additional info for failed Send USSD case

[Jeevaka Badrappan]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1035 bytes --]

---
 src/stk.c |   10 +++++++++-
 1 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)

diff --git a/src/stk.c b/src/stk.c
index bbbc4fd..59771b0 100644
--- a/src/stk.c
+++ b/src/stk.c
@@ -1621,6 +1621,7 @@ static void send_ussd_callback(int error, int dcs, const unsigned char *msg,
 	struct ofono_error failure = { .type = OFONO_ERROR_TYPE_FAILURE };
 	struct stk_response rsp;
 	enum sms_charset charset;
+	unsigned char addnl;
 
 	if (stk->pending_cmd->send_ussd.alpha_id &&
 			stk->pending_cmd->send_ussd.alpha_id[0])
@@ -1661,7 +1662,14 @@ static void send_ussd_callback(int error, int dcs, const unsigned char *msg,
 		break;
 
 	default:
-		send_simple_response(stk, STK_RESULT_TYPE_USSD_RETURN_ERROR);
+		rsp.result.type = STK_RESULT_TYPE_USSD_RETURN_ERROR;
+		addnl = 0; /* No specific cause can be given */
+		rsp.result.additional = &addnl;
+		rsp.result.additional_len = 1;
+
+		if (stk_respond(stk, &rsp, stk_command_cb))
+			stk_command_cb(&failure, stk);
+
 		break;
 	}
 }
-- 
1.7.0.4

Re: [PATCH] stk: Additional info for failed Send USSD case

[Denis Kenzior]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 893 bytes --]

Hi Jeevaka,

> +	unsigned char addnl;

Lets try to be consistent with other parts of stk.c.
Use unsigned char no_cause[] = { 0x00 };

>  
>  	if (stk->pending_cmd->send_ussd.alpha_id &&
>  			stk->pending_cmd->send_ussd.alpha_id[0])
> @@ -1661,7 +1662,14 @@ static void send_ussd_callback(int error, int dcs, const unsigned char *msg,
>  		break;
>  
>  	default:
> -		send_simple_response(stk, STK_RESULT_TYPE_USSD_RETURN_ERROR);
> +		rsp.result.type = STK_RESULT_TYPE_USSD_RETURN_ERROR;
> +		addnl = 0; /* No specific cause can be given */
> +		rsp.result.additional = &addnl;
> +		rsp.result.additional_len = 1;
> +

Then rsp.result.additional_len = sizeof(no_cause);
rsp.result.additional = no_cause

> +		if (stk_respond(stk, &rsp, stk_command_cb))
> +			stk_command_cb(&failure, stk);
> +
>  		break;
>  	}
>  }

Otherwise looks good.

Regards,
-Denis