Created an attachment (id=671243) soul 3.5 fail log +++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #409505 +++ DEFECT DESCRIPTION: [STK]call established not control by call control with modify command REPRODUCING PROCEDURES: 1.load one simulated SIM card and SATK application which can send "call control" command; 2.power on phone and run the case SATK->CALL control->STN08005->CC Alpha ID present; 3.dialling number not modify by control command--->KO from the network emulator, the call has already been modified ,but ME still keep display the old dial number. EXPECTED BEHAVIOUR: call control command can rightly execute ,ME will display the modified dial number. ASSOCIATE SPECIFICATION: TEST PLAN REFERENCE: TS spec 11.14 TOOLS AND PLATFORMS USED: V10I+AA. USER IMPACT: Middle. REPRODUCING RATE: 2/2. For FT PR, Please list reference mobile's behavior: ++++++++++ end of initial bug #409505 description ++++++++++

Dear Mozilla, I found this in the log: I/GeckoDump( 288): [system] sendStkResponse to command: {"commandNumber":1,"typeOfCommand":16,"commandQualifier":0,"options":{"confirmMessage":"Call set up ?","callMessage":"","address":"0155663732"}} I/GeckoDump( 288): [system] sendStkResponse -- # response = {"hasConfirmed":true,"resultCode":0} I/Gecko ( 288): -----------------response.command = 16 D/use-Rlog/RLOG-RIL_QC_B2G( 288): [SUB0] [0150]> STK_HANDLE_CALL_SETUP_REQUESTED_FROM_SIM D/use-Rlog/RLOG-RIL_QC_B2G( 288): [SUB0] [0150]< STK_HANDLE_CALL_SETUP_REQUESTED_FROM_SIM D/STK_QC_B2G( 288): Received solicited response STK_HANDLE_CALL_SETUP_REQUESTED_FROM_SIM D/AudioHardwareALSA( 275): AudioResourceManager - setParameter D/AudioResourceManager( 275): setParameter vsid=281026560;call_state=1: D/AudioHardwareALSA( 275): AudioResourceManager - setParameter D/AudioResourceManager( 275): setParameter vsid=281022464;call_state=2: D/use-Rlog/RLOG-RIL_QC_B2G( 288): [SUB0] [UNSL]< UNSOL_RESPONSE_CALL_STATE_CHANGED D/use-Rlog/RLOG-RIL_QC_B2G( 288): [SUB0] [0151]> GET_CURRENT_CALLS D/use-Rlog/RLOG-RIL_QC_B2G( 288): [SUB0] [0151]< GET_CURRENT_CALLS {[{index:1,state:RIL_CALL_DIALING,toa:129,isMpty:false,isMT:false,als:0,isVoice:true,isVoicePrivacy:false,number:"",numberPresentation:0,name:"(null)",namePresentation:0,}] E/CALL_TRACKER_QC_B2G( 288): Phantom call appeared, 2 D/CALL_TRACKER_QC_B2G( 288): Phone state is OFFHOOK D/CALL_TRACKER_QC_B2G( 288): updateWakeState: keepScreenOn = 1 (isRinging 0, isDialing 1) I/Gecko ( 288): -*- [SUB0] QCContentHelper_QC_B2G: sendMessage to content process: telephony-new-call{} I/Gecko ( 288): -*- [SUB0] QCContentHelper_QC_B2G: Notify system message manager of telephony-new-call D/NS_TELEPHONY_PROVIDER_QC_B2G( 288): [SUB0] TelephonyListener:CallStateChanged D/NS_TELEPHONY_PROVIDER_QC_B2G( 288): conn[1]:state=DIALING,num=,active=true,mt=false,emerg=false,conf=false I/Gecko ( 288): -*- [SUB0] QCContentHelper_QC_B2G: sendMessage to content process: telephony-phone-state-change{ state : 2, } I/Gecko ( 288): -*- [SUB0] QCContentHelper_QC_B2G: Phone state change: 2 D/PHONE_QC_B2G( 288): SetAudioMode() for phone state OFFHOOK D/use-Rlog/RLOG-RIL_QC_B2G( 288): [SUB0] [0152]> GET_CURRENT_CALLS D/use-Rlog/RLOG-RIL_QC_B2G( 288): [SUB0] [0152]< GET_CURRENT_CALLS {[{index:1,state:RIL_CALL_ALERTING,toa:145,isMpty:false,isMT:false,als:0,isVoice:true,isVoicePrivacy:false,number:"+33155663732",numberPresentation:0,name:"(null)",namePresentation:0,}] D/CONNECTION_QC_B2G( 288): Update parent=mForegroundCall, hasNewParent=0, wasConnectingInOrOut=1, wasHolding=0, isConnectingInOrOut=1, wasConf=0, isConf=0, changed=1 D/CALL_TRACKER_QC_B2G( 288): Phone state is OFFHOOK D/CALL_TRACKER_QC_B2G( 288): updateWakeState: keepScreenOn = 0 (isRinging 0, isDialing 0) D/NS_TELEPHONY_PROVIDER_QC_B2G( 288): [SUB0] TelephonyListener:CallStateChanged D/NS_TELEPHONY_PROVIDER_QC_B2G( 288): conn[1]:state=ALERTING,num=+33155663732,active=true,mt=false,emerg=false,conf=false Dear All, Right after we execute call control command, we got this: D/use-Rlog/RLOG-RIL_QC_B2G( 288): [SUB0] [0151]< GET_CURRENT_CALLS {[{index:1,state:RIL_CALL_DIALING,toa:129,isMpty:false,isMT:false,als:0,isVoice:true,isVoicePrivacy:false,number:"",numberPresentation:0,name:"(null)",namePresentation:0,}] So gaia shows "withheld number" to user. Then we got this: D/use-Rlog/RLOG-RIL_QC_B2G( 288): [SUB0] [0152]< GET_CURRENT_CALLS {[{index:1,state:RIL_CALL_ALERTING,toa:145,isMpty:false,isMT:false,als:0,isVoice:true,isVoicePrivacy:false,number:"+33155663732",numberPresentation:0,name:"(null)",namePresentation:0,}] But gaia didn't update the number to user? What shall we do???

Does this reproduce on a 1.1 Buri device?

Hi, Can't reproduce on v1.1. And I have file an SR(01493096) for QC's help. Hi Carol, Please help push that case, Thanks you so much.

We will track this internally through our SR system.

RIL is correctly notifying the upper layers. The state change notifications all look good: D/NS_TELEPHONY_PROVIDER_QC_B2G( 288): [SUB0] TelephonyListener:CallStateChanged D/NS_TELEPHONY_PROVIDER_QC_B2G( 288): conn[1]:state=DIALING,num=,active=true,mt=false,emerg=false,conf=false D/NS_TELEPHONY_PROVIDER_QC_B2G( 288): [SUB0] TelephonyListener:CallStateChanged D/NS_TELEPHONY_PROVIDER_QC_B2G( 288): conn[1]:state=ALERTING,num=+33155663732,active=true,mt=false,emerg=false,conf=false D/NS_TELEPHONY_PROVIDER_QC_B2G( 288): [SUB0] TelephonyListener:CallStateChanged D/NS_TELEPHONY_PROVIDER_QC_B2G( 288): conn[1]:state=ACTIVE,num=+33155663732,active=true,mt=false,emerg=false,conf=false Looks like this is a Gecko or Gaia issue. Looking at TelephonyCall.webidl, looks like the only notification for a number change could be onstatechange and it doesn't look like Gaia uses that for this case.

Vance - Can you find out if this is a cert blocker for TCL?

Yes, this is a cert blocker for TCL

This is more like a gecko bug. Telephony.cpp updates the state of an existing call but doesn't update its number.

Hsinyi is working on this bug.

(In reply to Hsin-Yi Tsai [:hsinyi] from comment #12) After you fix that issue, how would Gaia get notified of the change?

(In reply to Michael Schwartz [:m4] from comment #14) > (In reply to Hsin-Yi Tsai [:hsinyi] from comment #12) > > After you fix that issue, how would Gaia get notified of the change? The updated number will be delivered with existing events, such as onstatechange or onconnected ...

Not sure why this is marked as regression. Gecko code has never handled this number update case well. The possible reason we didn't catch this before is timing ... Seems we were lucky to always capture the sequent updated call number.

Call number might change during call state transition. I'm planning to make sure that whenever gecko dispatches call state change events to gaia, call number is always up-to-date. With this approach, there's *no* additional event for only "number" change. Gaia would need to pay attention to displaying the right number. Does this sound good to Dialer?

I'm not sure to understand the problem. In which cases can a call get a different number? I'm asking because this as an impact on which number we record into the call log. Also I think this shouldn't be 1.3+ because we never had code that updates the number in Gaia and neither in Gecko per comment 16. So this is a new feature, not a regression.

(In reply to Anthony Ricaud (:rik) [out March 27 & 28] from comment #18) > In which cases can a call get a different number? I'm asking because this as an impact on which number we > record into the call log. Hi Anthony, I can't (right now) think of any cases where the number changes after the call transitions to connected but I don't know if that should be relevant - call-log has to be updated when the call is disconnected so perhaps you could update all info then.

(In reply to Michael Schwartz [:m4] from comment #19) > (In reply to Anthony Ricaud (:rik) [out March 27 & 28] from comment #18) > > In which cases can a call get a different number? I'm asking because this as an impact on which number we > > record into the call log. > > Hi Anthony, > > I can't (right now) think of any cases where the number changes after the > call transitions to connected but I don't know if that should be relevant - > call-log has to be updated when the call is disconnected so perhaps you > could update all info then. Usually the number is changed by modem or STK in the transition between 'dialing' and 'alerting' state. As Michael explained, I can't see the case that the number changes after 'connected.'

Dear All, The expected behavior of "Call Control" case is: 1 display the old number(like 0155663732 in the log) when the call state is dialing; 2 display the new number(like +33155663732 in the log) when the call state is connected; And v1.1 is OK.

(In reply to xiaokang.chen from comment #21) > Dear All, > The expected behavior of "Call Control" case is: > 1 display the old number(like 0155663732 in the log) when the call state is > dialing; > 2 display the new number(like +33155663732 in the log) when the call state > is connected; > > And v1.1 is OK. As comment 18 stated, this is a new feature to both gecko and gaia. If the dialer app is launched a little bit more slowly, then it is very likely this issue is concealed. And seems we were lucky enough for v1.1.

Maybe we will need a gaia bug.

Vance - Can you discuss with TCL if we get a waiver for this? comment 22 seems to imply this is a feature request.

(In reply to Jason Smith [:jsmith] from comment #24) > Vance - Can you discuss with TCL if we get a waiver for this? comment 22 > seems to imply this is a feature request. I will discuss with TCL about that. But the thing is, somehow this one cannot be reproduced in 1.1(according to Comment#22, that is because we were lucky in 1.1...). However to Carriers, this is simply regression, which makes it difficult to get a waiver. Anyway I will try to see if we can waive this one, but I still hope we can keep implementing and hopefully it can be ready for 1.3 soon Thanks

Dear All, You can waive for this pr. I will try to do a workaround in gaia.

Thanks(In reply to xiaokang.chen from comment #26) > Dear All, > You can waive for this pr. I will try to do a workaround in gaia. Appreciate your support Xiaokang, we will try to come out a formal solution in the later release. Thanks

Moving to backlog based on comment 26, 27

Reopen this for the general solution for m-c

Update number with toa, and .isEmergency flag after STK call control

Comment on attachment 8514838 [details] [diff] [review] Patch Review of attachment 8514838 [details] [diff] [review]: ----------------------------------------------------------------- Hi Aknow, Call number + toa and .isEmergency flag are updated.

Comment on attachment 8514838 [details] [diff] [review] Patch Review of attachment 8514838 [details] [diff] [review]: ----------------------------------------------------------------- Looks good. Thank you.

Per bug 1089447 nominate to 2.0M+

https://treeherder.mozilla.org/ui/#/jobs?repo=try&revision=8e294e8abb42 try on 2.0m

Hi Hsin-Yi, Can you raise pull request to 2.0M? Kai-Zhen will help to merge then. Thank you!

Sure! Senlin, 2.0m patch is ready. Please help merge it, thanks! https://treeherder.mozilla.org/ui/#/jobs?repo=try&revision=8e294e8abb42

Dear Ryan, Please help to land on 2.0M branch. Thank you!

https://hg.mozilla.org/releases/mozilla-b2g32_v2_0m/rev/1f4803167bd5 Does this need to land on b2g34 (v2.1) as well? Please nominate it for approval if so.

(In reply to Ryan VanderMeulen [:RyanVM UTC-4] from comment #43) > https://hg.mozilla.org/releases/mozilla-b2g32_v2_0m/rev/1f4803167bd5 > > Does this need to land on b2g34 (v2.1) as well? Please nominate it for > approval if so. Hi Ryan, I haven't received the request so okay for not landing on v2.1 for now. I'll ask for approval if the need comes. Thank you for the help!

Hi Hsin-Yi, If this problem also happen in 2.1. I suggest we also fix it now since partner already have plan to migrate to 2.1. Thanks!

(In reply to Josh Cheng [:josh] from comment #45) > Hi Hsin-Yi, > If this problem also happen in 2.1. I suggest we also fix it now since > partner already have plan to migrate to 2.1. Thanks! Hi Josh, This is 2.1 affected, and I'd like to help provide 2.1 patch. However, as this is at CC stage and it's release manager's call to decide if this is a blocker, could you just set blocker flag accordingly so that release manager could triage it? If the decision is made, I will provide 2.1 patch asap. Thank you!

Josh, can you create another bug and see if we should land to 2.1 after talking with Bhavana? Thank you.

Hi Hsinyi, Error on 2.0m [JavaScript Error: "this._isEmergencyNumber is not a function" {file: "jar:file:///system/b2g/omni.ja!/components/TelephonyService.js" line: 699}]

(In reply to Szu-Yu Chen [:aknow] from comment #48) > Hi Hsinyi, > > Error on 2.0m > > [JavaScript Error: "this._isEmergencyNumber is not a function" {file: > "jar:file:///system/b2g/omni.ja!/components/TelephonyService.js" line: 699}] Thank you, Aknow. Hi Senlin, Could you help back this patch out from 2.0m? I need to provide a different version for this. Sorry for any inconvenience.

(In reply to Kevin Hu [:khu] from comment #47) > Josh, can you create another bug and see if we should land to 2.1 after > talking with Bhavana? Thank you. Hi Kevin, Done, bug 1096128 is created and I have asked Bhavana to assess whether to land on 2.1. Thanks!

Correct undefined function error.

Comment on attachment 8519744 [details] [diff] [review] [2.0m] 986308.patch -v2 Review of attachment 8519744 [details] [diff] [review]: ----------------------------------------------------------------- Hi Aknow, comment 48 fixed. Could you help review this? Thank you.

https://treeherder.mozilla.org/ui/#/jobs?repo=try&revision=4d9da1e01ba3 wait for result coming

(In reply to Hsin-Yi Tsai [:hsinyi] from comment #54) > https://treeherder.mozilla.org/ui/#/jobs?repo=try&revision=4d9da1e01ba3 wait > for result coming looks good! Seinlin, please help merge 2.0m patch, thank you.