ravthan / all-eyes

Automatically exported from code.google.com/p/all-eyes
0 stars 0 forks source link

It looks like the ae daemon alwasy fails to match the event message in order to take the action #101

Closed GoogleCodeExporter closed 8 years ago

GoogleCodeExporter commented 8 years ago
The action from aeProxy arrives at 'ae' daemon. The 'ae' daemon compares the 
arrived message with the messages in its buffer. It looks like the comparison 
always fail whether the message timed out too soon or other issues.

Below is the 'ae' daemon output:
--------------------------------
from Android-SSL: [:10:1353478627160771-114:33:PM:0003:11:A1:myproc2_myproc2 
-a_logmsg:]

VALID Android-SSL message 
[:10:1353478627160771-114:33:PM:0003:11:A1:myproc2_myproc2 -a_logmsg:]
ProcessMsg: go get EventId
ProcessMsg: EventId Received: 0003
ProcessMsg: go get statusOp
ProcessMsg: statusOp Received: 0003
ProcessMsg: go get Action Message
ProcessMsg: ACTION Received: A1
msg version: 10
msg msgType: 33
msg monCodeName: PM
aeSSLProcess: received ACTION msg 
[:10:1353478627160771-114:33:PM:0003:11:A1:myproc2_myproc2 -a_logmsg:]
aeSSLProcess: monitor message ID 1353478627160771-114
aeSSLProcess: monitor code name PM
aeSSLProcess: monitor EventId 0003
aeSSLProcess: monitor statusOp 11
aeSSLProcess: monitor action A1
aeAction: Not in Cache. Returning error
aemgrThread: Terminating due to invalid message
aemgrThread: Listening for CONNECTION

Original issue reported on code.google.com by toddd...@gmail.com on 21 Nov 2012 at 6:33

GoogleCodeExporter commented 8 years ago
Found the source of the issue. The problem is that the received message has the 
message type <msg-type> 33. However, all messages in cache have <msg-type> 
22.The issue is in function isMsgInCache() of file aemgrmgmt.c

Original comment by toddd...@gmail.com on 21 Nov 2012 at 7:34

GoogleCodeExporter commented 8 years ago
Fixed as suggested in comment 1.

r968

Original comment by toddd...@gmail.com on 21 Nov 2012 at 8:55

GoogleCodeExporter commented 8 years ago
Verified with unit testing

Original comment by tbrt....@gmail.com on 9 Dec 2012 at 9:24