Battery consumption about csipsimple HOT 143 OPEN

You're right, for now absolutely no optimization has be done to reduce battery 
consumption. (The app is still in alpha phase).

But there is things you can already modify in settings that will reduce battery 
usage:

* In the account settings (using expert wizard), change the keep alive interval 
to 40 for example instead of 15. This is the default value in 0.00-12, so if 
you are using 0.00-12 nothing has to be done on this point. It will reduce by 3 
the amount of packets sent to the sip server.
* In global settings > network settings, you can disable the Lock Wifi option. 
This option ensure wifi is always on, if you want to be sure to receive your 
calls. This option is probably turned off by default in SipDroid for example. 
Activating this option drain the battery but ensure you will receive all your 
calls if you are not authorized to use your 3G connection to receive/make calls.
* If you don't matter receiving your SIP calls and want to use it only for 
outgoing calls, CSipSimple provide a good option for that. In global settings > 
network settings, you can uncheck both wifi and 3G for incoming calls.
In this case, CSipSimple will launch itself ONLY when you want to place a call 
and you will save a lot of battery (highly better than sipdroid that frequently 
try to register or check if no registration is possible).

I've in my mind some improvements that will allow to save a lot of battery.

For issue #67 comment 2, 3 and 4, it's probably a display issue, I will work on 
it soon.

For me personally, it is important to have it registered at all times (under 
WiFi). I have "register when on WiFi", and "outgoing/incoming calls when on 
WiFi", and I do _not_ have "Lock WiFi". The latter does _not_ impede incoming 
calls, and in fact I think I am not seeing diverted incoming calls since 0.12.

I have a feeling that battery use became a little better in 0.12 but it's 
within the margin of error, and may be just false impression.

I'll comment on #67 there.

I (idly) wonder if it would be possible to get away *without* holding 
PARTIAL_WAKE_LOCK. For re-registrations, be waken up by timed events, for 
answering calls, rely on being woken up by incoming unicast packet. I am not 
sure if the latter needs any special setup to work.

I don't think so.
For re-registration, it's possible yes. You can use timed events (known as 
"alarm" events in android -- see 
http://developer.android.com/intl/fr/reference/android/app/AlarmManager.html). 
Theses events are raised even if the phone is in the deep sleep mode (CPU off).

*But* for answering calls I think it is not possible :
In fact when CPU is in deep sleep mode, application can't treat network packets 
:
The CPU scheduler never give the token to android applications in this mode. 
Some application (especially IM ones) pool (using alarms) to be sure there is 
no new message to treat, but this method doesn't match what we want with a 
telephony application. (Can be tested but not sure will be really good).

I know that iphone has such a feature with their new "multitask" os... (Note 
the quotes ;) ). I mean, the API enable to declare "multitask" sockets and when 
there is activities on theses sockets, there is a wake up of the system. Btw, 
that's really complicated to implement (all the more so as you try to use a 
cross plateform sip stack). Maybe one day such a feature will be allowed in the 
android sdk. 

Interesting. I did this experiment: I stopped cSipSimple, (and anything that 
might use PARTIAL_WAKE_LOCK), verified that mPartialCount=0, unplugged it from 
USB, ran ping against it and turned it off by power button. By all reasons, the 
CPU must have been turned off. However, it continued to respond to ping 
(although with bigger delay due to PSP mode). This means that CPU did run 
"enough" to respond to ICMP echo requests. It is the kernel IP stack that sends 
echo reply packets, CPU must run to have them sent. This apparently supports my 
theory that when a packet is received by the WiFi adapter it wakes up the CPU.

What I did not check in this test is whether userspace processes will be 
dispatched, but from what I did observe, it seems worth a try to check if the 
app will work without constantly holding PARTIAL_WAKE_LOCK, does it?

I would try it myself but I have trouble building the package from source 
("[exec] /export/src/csipsimple/CSipSimple/AndroidManifest.xml:2: error: No 
resource identifier found for attribute 'installLocation' in package 'android'" 
when I try "ant debug")

OK, I was able to check my theory. I commented out the lines that create and 
acquire PARTIAL_WAKE_LOCK (in SipService.java around the line 780), rebuilt the 
package, ran it, verified that mPartialCount was still zero while the app was 
running, unplugged USB, turned it off via power button, and made a call to the 
device.

And it worked!

Now, *maybe* it's still a good idea to get the lock for the duration of 
re-registration process, but for the rest of the time, it seems unneeded. And 
by not holding it all the time we maybe can save some battery juice. Do you 
think you should try?

just want to share that I made the same experience as egcrosser, battery life 
seems to be greater on sipdroid. I know it's alpha and am looking forward for 
changes.

bear in mind that sipdroid claims battery life is improved when using a PBX 
service like sipdroid's own PBXES.org. Now I don't know, but I use two sip 
accounts (one incoming, one outgoing) which are handled by PBX. With CsipSimple 
I just added both accounts. this could decrease battery life...

(sure, I could use PBX with CsipSimple... just fruit for thought)

Well the case for using pbxes to save battery life is to use a TCP connection 
to pbxes with a high keep-alive time since most NATs keep TCP connections open 
for a lot longer then UDP connections. This means the radio does not need to 
transmit data as often and thus saving battery life.

So if you have a provider or a server that supports TCP then you can use this 
directly with CSipSimple if not then unfortunately pbxes does not seem to work 
using TCP with the pjsip stack (or at least I have not gotten the combination 
to work as expected - see comments in bug 50). There are other options such as 
sipsorcery which work though.

But the PARTIAL_WAKE_LOCK is very interesting as this in connection with TCP 
might lead to improvements. Personally I think battery life is one of the most 
important issues that still needs to be solved.

Yes really interesting test egcrosser !

Really worth to be tried. At least in a first time as an option. 
Since, we are still in the alpha phase it's probably worth to test to disable 
the partial wake lock by default, we'll get more feedback on it.
I take the point to integrate this one in the next build.

This point can be dependant from the device. In fact my assumption (that 
partial wake lock was necessary) was based on test on a Archos 5IT. But this 
device has some special sleep policies : for example it can goes in an 
"hibernate" mode. 
So probably the final choice , as for other tweaky params, will be to find out 
at the first run what is the device we are running on, and setting the best 
configuration for this device.

+1 for a build without partial wake lock. Any thoughts on getting some 
"creative inspiration" from a certain other open source SIP project as to how 
they're avoiding this?

Sipdroid use a partial wake lock as far as I know (not read all the code but 
sounds there is somewhere in registration process where a partial wake lock is 
put down). Not read how Linphone manage this point.

But to be sure, we should test it ourself. Since csipsimple runs as a native 
library, maybe behavior is different regarding cpu policy. And there is things 
really strange in Sipdroid (such as alarms that launch portion of code to check 
if network is present instead of relying only on network events... maybe there 
is a reason for that but as I don't know why...)

> alarms that launch portion of code to check if network
> is present instead of relying only on network events...

I don't know if this is related, but there is a problem in an XMPP client 
(Beem) when it, for unknown reason, miss some of connection/disconnection 
events.

That said, cSipSimple always disconnects and reconnects reliably for me.

Another thought how to minimize energy consumption: there is no need to 
re-register so often. SIP protocol suggests that you register as often as the 
registrar tell it. I think the typical value is several minutes.

Now, when the device is behind NAT (almost always), it is necessary to 
periodically refresh the relation, usually you need to do it more frequently. 
For that, you can use "empty" SIP messages, i.e. just a single CRLF, without 
headers and body. They are just ignored by the server, no answer is sent, so 
they are in every aspect cheaper than re-registrations.

I once owned a hardware SIP phone that used this approach.

Reporting success :-)

Since the app has an option to disable PARTIAL_WAKE_LOCK, I am running in this 
mode and battery usage has noticeably improved. I think it is now in line with 
or better than what I had when I ran Sipdroid.

However, it feels(!) like the device is not registered (or not responding to 
calls) more often then before, and sometimes I see the "Sip registered" notice 
the instant I turn it on. This is not conclusive, as I also upgraded to FroYo 
at the same time, and the the difference is not very significant even if it 
exists.

Anyway, I have a theory why this *might* happen: when you re-register in the 
background, you are not obtaining PARTIAL_WAKE_LOCK for the duration of this 
process. So, if registration cannot complete in 10 seconds (due to packet loss 
in the network or whatever), the system shuts down the CPU and registration 
retries no longer happen until CPU is woken up for some unrelated reason. Then 
retry (usually) succeeds and things are all right. But while it was sleeping, 
the server thinks that the device is not registered and do not send invites to 
it.

I am not sure if my theory has merit. But even if not, it seems a Right Thing 
to obtain PARTIAL_WAKE_LOCK at the moment when you are woken for 
re-registration and release it at the moment when re-registration succeeds or 
you decide to give up and fail. What do you think?

Thanks!

Re-registration is done by the native library. So it doesn't acquire any lock 
on the android system. But my think is that it's not linked to CPU if it 
automatically re-register when you turn on the screen. If when you turn on the 
screen it re-register, it means that network comes up (and this made csipsimple 
re-register).

If you are only on wifi, you might try to activate the *lock wifi option* (in 
network settings). Maybe (that's just a though), since Partial wake lock is not 
activated anymore, wifi consider it can goes in sleeping mode (disconnect 
itself or psp mode ? ).
So maybe worth to test with lock wifi option activated.

I can also try to use alarms methods that temporarily lock cpu each time 
re-registration should be done. But obviously if re-registration fails, it 
means that incoming call should also fails and alarm will not solve issue for 
incoming calls.

> If when you turn on the screen it re-register, it means that network comes up 
(and this made csipsimple re-register).

No, I don't think so. I have wifi sleep policy set to "sleep never" in WiFi 
Settings -> Advanced. And it registers really fast when I press power, 
establishing WiFi connection takes much longer.

As I said, the situation happens rather rarely, and if your theory was right it 
would happen to me every time the device goes to sleep for more than 15 minutes.

I wonder if it would be possible to initiate re-registration "by hand" from an 
android alarm handler instead of relying on pjsip's internal mechanism... Just 
a thought.

> But obviously if re-registration fails, it means that incoming call should 
also fails and alarm will not solve issue for incoming calls.

Obviously. My point is, *maybe* sometimes retrying process gets "frozen" when 
it takes more than 10 seconds, and we have it "would have succeeded after a 
retry but did not have a chance".

As I said, it's all speculation and not a proven theory.

Issue 204 has been merged into this issue.

I'm also looking forward for having a version of CSipSimple with 
PARTIAL_WAKE_LOCK being disabled to save my battery life.

It's very important to me for having a battery friendly client.

Thank you very much for creating and maintaining a great client.

Commenter 19, you can enable or disable the use of PARTIAL_WAKE_LOCK under 
Settings -> User Interface (in the dev. versions from the website, not in the 
market version).

Thank you egcrosser for letting me know. I'm using the dev version right now 
and I will report back the results.

I have found by setting the Reregister to 184 and Keep Alive to 100 (obtained 
by looking at SipDroid source), I can turn off Partial Wake Lock and not miss 
any calls on my Nexus 2.2 - 3g or wifi.

I am curious if others experience the same serendipity.

@krolaw, when you say "reregister" do you mean the "Register Timeout" setting? 
I've tried setting that to 184, and Keep Alive to 100 as you suggest, it still 
seems to only work intermittently.

Strange (works for me ;-) ).  Wifi or 3G?  If Wifi, make sure it is set to 
never sleep in system settings.  Are you using a Nexus?  Although it might be 
more network related as it works on a G1...

I am just starting to do some tests with CSIP and so far I configured a 
sipsorcery account with UDP connection and a timeout of 3600s and a keepalive 
interval of 120s and I receive calls and battery life seems to perform well. 

@tobias, what network are you on? tmo, verizon, sprint? Who is the VOIP 
provider behind sipsorcery? Also, how is the call quality with sipsorcery?

@krolaw, I have an EVO on sprint, and the symptoms for me are the same on wifi 
(no sleep), and 3G (always available). The only way I can get calls 
consistently is to use partial wake lock.

I have a sipsorcery account, so I may try funneling my SIP traffic through 
them, and see what happens.

Wow, it works great with SipSorcery. Thanks @tobias for (a) reminding me I have 
a SipSorcery account, and (b) the great idea to use it. Works great now!

I noticed that if my SIP server is down and the phone can't connect, battery 
comsumption goes through the roof.  Otherwise it seems fine to me.

Here's something interesting: I noticed that my airplane mode is a lot more 
power-hungry and I suspect cSipSimple, as it's the only new bit of software 
since this started happening.  Funny thing is, in the Market version, I have 
"use partial wakelock" unchecked, and Lock WiFi unchecked already.

One thing I'm experimenting with now: I disabled Incoming WiFi so that the 
client doesn't try to register outside of periods I manually launch it, until I 
later quit it.  (Works great, that's the setting I was looking for!)  Even if I 
use System Panel to kill it after I quit it, I notice it reappears in my 
process list shortly after (like the annoying Amazon MP3).  I would've expected 
it not to be restarted at all when configured that way.  Is this normal or am I 
missing an extra setting to disable that?

Yes it's normal that it appear in application list. Most of users are afraid 
about apps that appear in application list.
But actually that's harmless :
Android manage its own memory by it's own way. As CSipSimple potentially listen 
for network changes event (even if it actually does nothing if your 
configuration is set too), android put things in RAM memory and the app does 
absolutely nothing in background.

Those "auto-kill apps" are a really useless thing for android 2.0 and upper. 
And even worse sometimes if set to auto-kill these apps can drain the battery 
cause just try to umount things in memory and then android automatically 
restart the apps and it loop infinitely...

I'm not alone to say that great android gurus (the ones that code the android 
OS), try to explain this ... but unfortunately users still use this task 
manager apps in auto-kill mode.
You should for example read that :
http://blog.radioactiveyak.com/2010/05/when-to-include-exit-button-in-android.ht
ml
http://androidspin.com/2010/05/25/why-you-dont-need-a-task-killer-app-with-andro
id/
http://android-developers.blogspot.com/2010/04/multitasking-android-way.html

And so on...

Besides I'd like to add that in development version there is a more user 
friendly way to quit the app.
However it doesn't mean that it will disappear from task list. Just that it 
will do nothing. But appearing in the task list doesn't mean that it consume 
resources... even better sometimes it means that the application will consume 
less resources when waked up back.
You can compare that to the "suspend/hibernate" mode of a PC. It just freeze 
everything in memory to be able to wake up things quickly. And here in our 
case, it's managed by the Android OS system. it's not up to the developer to 
deal with that.

I'm not a developer nor an expert so maybe i'm going to say a very stupid 
thing! :)
To save battery and also receive incoming calls can you use google's push 
tecnology (C2DM) introduced with froyo? I noticed that application that use it 
don't waste battery at all, but are able to provide notifications very quickly. 
Examples of them are google's gmail app, google calendar, Chrome to phone, 
WhatsApp (it works great!), K9 mail client (not sure but i think so), BeeJive 
IM, ...
It's just a suggestion based on what i've seen until now, i don't know if it is 
really possible

To comment 31:

1. To "notice" C2DM events the handset needs to be connected to Internet at all 
times, this is not substantially different from being registered directly with 
a SIP server. There is no magic here that could dramatically decrease the power 
consumption.

2. To "notice" incoming INVITEs, some sort of proxy will need to run somewhere 
"in the cloud", registered with the SIP provider, and producing C2DM notices 
when it receives an INVITE. This would make the system prohibitively 
complicated, compared to the device directly talking to the service provider as 
it normally does.

3. The delay of C2DM delivery is at times much longer than an average person is 
prepared to wait for her call to be answered.

A follow-up on my comment #29 above.  Now that I disabled Incoming WiFi, I can 
confirm that my Airplane Mode battery consumption is back to its normal 
4-5%/day, so that seems to have been the cause for me.  (Nexus One, by the 
way.)  Luckily I prefer to manually activate my SIP client during periods when 
I make myself available, so I want Incoming WiFi to be off anyway. Problem 
solved for me. :)

Bottom line, whatever monitoring Incoming WiFi incurs, is consuming a bit of 
battery power during Airplane Mode; perhaps Airplane Mode itself could be 
detected to further reduce the amount of work cSipSimple does during that time? 
 Just a thought, I'm already quite happy with how things are now that I found 
this tweak.

To r3gis.3R and egcrosser regarding PARTIAL_WAKE_LOCK usage:

My understanding is that receipt of a network packet over an active interface 
(e.g. non-sleeping wifi) while the phone is sleeping will generate a CPU 
interrupt which will wake the CPU for a fixed small period of time (fraction of 
a second).  If the processing triggered by the packet requires more time to 
complete, the application should obtain a partial wake lock when processing 
starts and release it when processing finishes.  This explains why pinging the 
phone works when it's sleeping, and also implies that SIP applications should 
be obtaining and releasing wake locks dynamically, not holding them forever.  
I'd expect this change to result in much lower battery consumption without 
sacrificing incoming call reliability.

fanderay4, every I/O event generates an interrupt. The point is, when the CPU 
is switched off, it cannot process interrupts. However, when the network chip 
receives a unicast packet it generates a special signal (in addition to the 
interrupt) that switches the CPU on. Then the CPU handles the interrupt, and 
the kernel dispatches any application that might be waiting for this packet. 
The OS gives this application fixed time (10 seconds if I remember correctly) 
to run, and then switches the CPU off again. If the application decides that it 
needs to run longer to do its job, it must obtain any of WAKE_LOCKs before the 
10 second interval expires. And this is how csipsimple works (unless you check 
the "Use partial wake lock" checkbox in the settings, in which case it will 
keep the lock all the time).

Thanks for the clarification egcrosser.  If that's true then I don't see why 
the "Use partial wake lock" setting should ever be needed, and yet when I 
disable it, I permanently lose registration...

fanderay4, some combinations of hardware/OS version are known to have a bug: 
the radio chip it programmed improperly and does not wake up the CPU on 
incoming packets. I don't remember the number off the top of my head, you might 
try to look it up in android bugs section. If this is indeed your problem then 
you need to either upgrade the OS or "Use partial wake lock".

I use wifi only (sleep policy set to Never) with an HTC Wildfire running 
CyanogenMod 6.1-RC.  The only problem I'm aware of is 
<http://code.google.com/p/cyanogenmod/issues/detail?id=2403> which I knew to be 
responsible for having to set the "Stay awake during call" workaround option.  
I guess that's the culprit in this case too.

+1 for egcrosser comment. 

However there is still something that is still open and has to be explored : 
Actually, for incoming packet CSipSimple works the way you explained (if there 
is an incoming INVITE, csipsimple took a wake lock (however could be done more 
lower in pjsip sip stack but would be not easy to maintain (and probably not 
needed at all).

On the other side, CSipSimple tries to keep the UDP (or TCP) connection alive. 
To do so, it send (actually pjsip sends) packets every 'keep-alive interval' 
time. This is done inside the native library and no wake lock is done on this 
part. So if your sip server is not talkative, and supposing CPU is turned off 
by the OS, nothing will wake up pjsip threads to send the keep alive. (-- but 
that's not clear, as the thread is not registered by the dalvik JVM, I'm not 
sure at all of that --).
This is needed only if your carrier routers (or IP provider) cuts a connection 
without any traffic. 

A solution could be to use Alarms from android SDK ( 
http://developer.android.com/reference/android/app/AlarmManager.html ). But 
problem is to get that synchronized with the pjsip native stack on which we 
rely. In a first time could be an awful hack available as an option 
(intermediate to Lock CPU and no lock CPU).

This is a really tricky point to handle, all the more so as all devices doesn't 
manage things the same way, that all routers equipments doesn't behaves 
identically and that some sip servers are more talkative than others (some send 
frequent Notify which could be a solution). So to get something that works 
perfectly in all case and consume the optimal battery is really hard and should 
be thought as a background task (that I actually keep in mind but not top most 
priority for now) (reason why this issue is marked as task. If anybody wants to 
have a really close look to the issue and propose patches it will be welcome. 
;).

Question: Which is better on battery life for the Android phone: A server that 
is talkative and sends keep alive packets every X seconds, or for the phone to 
send the keep alive packets every x seconds?

Or are they equal?  Thanks

r3gis,
regarding re-registration from inside pjsip, do you happen to know how they are 
woken up to do the job at particular time? If they use Android's alarm manager, 
maybe getting and releasing the lock could be done in the "outer" Java part of 
the event handler?

If they are using unix alarm(2), then theoretically, it should be pjsip's job 
to obtain the lock for the duration of the registration process. As pjsip code 
would not want to deal with Java interfaces directly, maybe they could be 
persuaded to invoke caller-supplied callbacks before and after re-registration. 
Then csipsimple could provide such callbacks, in which the lock will be 
obtained and released.

Or maybe my speculation is completely off the point. In that case, just 
disregard it.

Also, I must tell that for me, the app works very stable recently. 
"Unexplained" loss of registration happens sometimes, but very seldom. I would 
not even be able to test a possible solution because problem is so rare.

@mark : it depends on implementation on the phone. For now csipsimple is most 
friendly with the talkative server approach (but server should send it with a 
not so high frequency to not drain the battery. However in the absolute the 
best approach is to let the client to be talkative : it may allow the client to 
detect it's own network type and adapt frequency of it's ka packets to the 
network type. On the other side, if we assume a alarm implementation, I'm not 
enough an expert to say whether alarm or waiting network socket is the best 
approach in term of battery usage.
What I can say is that if both server and client try to send keep alive packets 
one of the two are useless. (Most of the time in this case we'd like client to 
be silent). And also that if server send keep alive most of the time it's 
through a NOTIFY so it's a little bit heavier to process that a client packet 
(just a \r\n).


@egcrosser : Yes indeed could be integrated with pjsip. I've to check that but 
maybe could be done in the os_android.c port : it's the implementation some 
stuff for android regarding threading and scheduling, so could be managed 
safely and cleanly here, even if we need to talk to the java part. (That's 
already the case for the audio driver which is a separate source file). 
So worth to explore this approach. But I'll have to really focus on that and 
only that when I'll do this work :) For now too much other side things to do ;).

I am also experiencing high battery drain with cSipSimple on a custom Androd on 
HTC HD2. This is probably unsupported but the drain is normal (5-10mA) without 
cSipSimple registered. I use Battery Monitor Widget to monitor the devices 
battery usage.

Currently I have cSipSimple configured with a PBXes account over TCP with 
keep-alive set at 100 and register interval set at 1800. As long as cSipSimple 
is registered, battery drain is in the ~150mA vicinity. This translates to 
about 12%/hour with the screen off and me not using the phone.

Update to comment 43: I disabled all incoming data for cSipSimple (WIFI, 3G, 
etc) and disconnected. After letting it settle down to 5mA draw for a few 
minutes, I re-enabled the incoming data from easy settings and so far it is 
still at 5mA draw. Going to keep monitoring this.

@nlm : are you configured to be "always available" over wifi only? 
If so be aware of the fact that in this mode CSipSimple try to ensure that wifi 
is running which drain the battery (but if you want to be always available and 
use only wifi for that, that's the only solution, no miracle can be done ;) ).

I think that if you go in android device infos (android settings > about phone 
> battery usage) and have a look to what is consuming battery, you'll not find 
csipsimple but wifi as first entry.

A good compromise is to choose "available on wifi" (which keep your wifi policy 
- I assume when screen is on). Or if you don't mind to receive calls, "only for 
outgoing".

You can also try latest trunk version in which I've a little bit improves 
things regarding cpu consumption, but I don't think that it will help a lot, 
12%/hour is really really high (I never have that on my phone except on the 
galaxy S when there were a wifi bug on the ROM I used). 

Usually on my phones when 1%/hour is without csipsimple always running and 
activated I get 3-4%/hour when activated and locking wifi.
However if the wifi driver of your phone doesn't behaves correctly (which 
happened once on a ROM on my GalaxyS) it can increase a lot when wifi is locked 
by the app.

Just FYI, pbxes.org doesn't actually support very well TCP : they do not 
respect SIP RFC, which break pjsip (the SIP stack on which csipsimple rely), so 
you should disable it if you don't want to see unpredicatable latency when 
hanging up.

I have been observing another strange behaviour related to idle CPU usage that 
has a significant impact on battery as well as phone performance:

I'm using an HTC Wildfire (528MHz ARM11 CPU) running Android 2.2.1 (csipsimple 
r502), and my SIP provider requires re-registration every 60 seconds.  The "Use 
partial wake lock" and "Stay awake while on call" settings are required for me. 
 What I observe, by running "top" from a shell, is that when csipsimple is 
started from cold, its idle/background CPU usage is very low: <1%, except that 
about once a minute it rises to 5-7% for a couple of seconds, which I assume is 
due to re-registration processing.

However, after csipsimple has been running for a while (several hours) I find, 
again looking at top output, that the periodic CPU usage during the regular 
"spikes" starts to increase considerably.  csipsimple's usage itself may rise 
to 10-15% for a couple of seconds, but much more significantly, the 
system_server process becomes active at the same time and runs at 80-90% for as 
long as 10-15 seconds.

At first I didn't know what was triggering the system_server spikes and was 
prompted to troubleshoot because the phone had slowed to a crawl.  In doing so 
I found that killing csipsimple solved the problem, and also that restarting it 
solved the problem for some time, until hours later the excess system_server 
consumption would start coming back.

It would be interesting to hear from others what CPU usage patterns you see 
while csipsimple is registered but idle.  Also any insight as to what 
system_server could be doing that would cause it to start churning the CPU this 
way and how it could be related to csipsimple would be very helpful.

Here we are.
Revision 590 ship a big improvement (I hope so) in the way it manage keep alive.
It's now totally different approach from the previous one so that it ~should~ 
allow you to disable "Use partial wake lock" if you previously needed it.
It should also improve battery lifetime cause now :
 * The keep awake management is integrated with android OS approach of keep alives.
 * Keep alive is done synchronized for all accounts.

As consequence keep alive setting is not anymore related to account settings 
but to global settings. BTW, there is two keep alive settings. One for Wifi and 
one for mobile. By default I set wifi keep alive to 100s and mobile to 40s. Any 
feedback on these values is welcome :).

Now what is missing thing to have the lower battery consumption : activating 
STUN feature only when needed. This is planned in pjsip project for next 
release (in one or two week). So we can hope to have that soon :).
I've already decreased STUN timer from 20s to 90s which should leads to better 
perfs too. But I think that we will reach the best when pjsip will have the 
STUN feature only on calls establishment.

Initial testing of r590 confirms this is a major improvement!  I can now 
disable "Use partial wake lock" in the settings without losing registration, 
and battery consumption seems much lower.  Great work!  (I set keepalive to 50 
sec as provider's re-registration interval is 60 sec anyway)

[One very strange thing: my first test call with r590 brought the phone to a 
standstill immediately.  Investigating this I found calls were using G.729 even 
though I had not activated it!  This was causing csipsimple to peg the CPU.  
After going into settings and activating/deactivating it, this quirk seems to 
be resolved...]

Yes, as for codec problem, that's cause new version now differentiate codecs 
priorities (between wideband and narrowband).
However I have some piece of code that should reset codec priorities for 
working with that and that should not activate g729. But I've just noticed that 
it was done only if previous installed version were < 584. And I guess you were 
using 585 before.

I fix that, thanks for the info.

As for your provider re-registration interval you should ask them to allow 
higher re-registration interval. Cause for mobile that's worse to have 
re-registration to 60s. By default CSipSimple tries to ask with 300s (5min 
which is already very frequent and could be optimized I think).
All the more so as with new method, keep alive have not a deep impact on 
battery it's interesting to use it instead of re-registration.

I notice a high battery usage after making a call. Even if I turn off data, 
disable my sip account, and put the phone to sleep (it shows that it's been 
asleep the whole night), after only 10 hours or so the battery is nearly 
drained.

Then if I shutdown and turn the phone on again, all is well and the battery can 
last for 7 days or so in sleep mode. Something about making a call must stay on 
even after it is finished..

I have Nexus S btw, and I set csipsimple to make outgoing calls only.

Samsung Galaxy S I9000, Froyo 2.2: it really drains the battery very fast. I 
used both incoming and outgoing calls via it and end of the day battery is gone 
completely. 

Then I set to outgoing only with increased keep alive polling time and made 2-3 
calls, of 4 mins total and same results, end of the day, I am out of battery 
power, didn't understand it as it was on 'outgoing only' mode, then it should 
register only when needed but that seems not correct. Just to make sure I have 
had no other app when using it.

Its a good app, works fine with few minor issues but battery consumption made 
me uninstall it, with due respect to developers.

Going to install it again now, as I flashed official 2.2.1, which is 
surprisingly giving me 2.5 days battery at the moment, with 3g use and all the 
time wifi on. Shall post results again, if I notice something different. 

But please look into this, its leading sip client at the moment, don't let 
battery consumption issue eat it. I am sure, you great developers will address 
it soon.

Regards,
SSA

Tested with 2.2.1 on SGS 'only outgoing on wifi', made only 1 call of 1 min, 
from full charge to ~30% in < 8 hours. Sorry but uninstall. Please look into 
this issue.

Thanks

Regards,
SSA 

I have also experienced very high battery consumption on my Nexus S after 
making a call. Even if I disable the account () after making a call the battery 
seems to drain very quickly. On my Nexus One I have never seen this problem. 
This is also the first time I am trying the G.729 which I never tried using on 
the Nexus One.

Issue 744 has been merged into this issue.

Just found something that was wrong with proximity sensor that was possibly 
leaking depending on devices/configuration after a call...
Fixed and will be available in next build.

However, a strange thing is that Android keep an sensor thread even if I 
actually unregister the sensor listener... weird... I'll investigate a little 
bit more, but at least should be more clean now

Running build 678 (feb 28). Seem to have some issues with CPU not going to 
sleep, but they tend to happen only after a while, and then it's permanent. I'm 
not sure exactly what triggers it, but I believe it's starting to happen in 
roughly the following scenario:
1. I'm at home, WIFI is connected, CSipSimple is connected - cpu is asleep, 
battery drain is minimal
2. I leave home, WIFI disconnects, CSipSimple disconnects (it's not set to 
connect over 3G)
3. I reach the office, WIFI connects, CSipSimple connects.
4. Cpu stays awake, battery drain gets high.

Phone: HTC Desire Z running CyanogenMod 7 (Gingerbread)
CSipSimple configuration:
- set to connect to an asterisk server over UDP
- all values are default, only use wifi for calls
- dialer and call logs integration is on, partial wake lock is off, keep awake 
while on call is off as it's not needed, log level is 0

Been having this issue at least since the last version in the Market.

Thanks for looking into it, great work btw :)

Correction, seems to happen as well after leaving my office (where I was 
connected) when getting out of WIFI range and connecting on 3G. SIP is 
inactive, but battery drain happens, CPU is awake. Until then had no drain 
whatsoever.

Note: The fix for issue 676 (present in r690 and newer) may significantly 
reduce battery consumption for some. The reduction will be more noticeable the 
shorter the re-registration interval and the longer the csipsimple uptime.

Issue 832 has been merged into this issue.

Here's a kind of FYI report:
I was watching the battery applet output. As you may know, on Gingerbread it 
has a nice display with the discharge graph and a number of stripes showing 
when various elements of the system where active. One stripe is for "CPU Awake" 
status. I noticed that much of the time this stripe looks like a comb - the CPU 
is idle most of the time, but often wakes briefly to do some little job (like 
re-registration, or things unrelated to SIP). This is just as expected. 
However, for a long spans, like many hours at a time, the stripe is solid, i.e. 
the CPU is awake. Which should not be the case.

I decided to check if this behavior is related to CSipSimple, and turned it off 
for two days, activating native SIP instead. Result - there are still combs and 
solid spans. I don't think that there is visible difference. I'd say it's not 
likely that CSipSimple is causing the spans with the CPU awake. It might be 
useful to also try to live without any SIP agent active at all, but I did not 
do that.

Another result: after a day with CSipSimple I usually have above 50% juice 
left, in the two days with native SIP I had noticeably less than 50% by the 
nighttime.

I'm using CSipSimple on a Droid Pro and have no issues whatsoever related to 
battery life. It's stellar!

Running the latest version from market - 0.01-01 r615.

Two main (critical) problems:

1. Time-to-time CSipSimpole looses its registration (meaning I can't receive 
calls at these times). Very bad thing... Tried to change "WiFi keep alive" 
setting - no improvement.

2. Battery consumption is terrible. 
HTC Aria, 100% charged, overnight (less then 10h in completely idle mode) it 
looses 50% of battery charge. Network stats in Android Task Manager show: 
received ~ 190KiB, sent ~ 430KiB, total ~ 620KiB (values are all average). The 
network traffic is almost the same with "WiFi keep alive" setting either 80sec 
or 300sec.

For comparison: under the same conditions Sipdroid v.2.2b takes about 6-7% of 
battery charge overnight (ending at 94%) and I do not see it loosing 
registration...

I have disabled unoptimized STUN. But, still my phone realy fast loosing charge.
CSipSimple CPU usage 2% always! No any network traffic, what it doing in 
background, works in boinc project?

  PID CPU% S  #THR     VSS     RSS PCY UID      Name

 3569   9% R     1    928K    416K  fg root     top
 2440   2% S    18 182468K  17624K  bg app_89   com.csipsimple

Here is explanation why CSipSimple time-to-time looses its registration (see 
p.1 in my post #63 above) - you don't use a proper timer. 

Below are time stamps collected from log generated by FreeSWITCH when 
CSipSimple has this setting: "Register timeout (sec)" = "60" 

2011-03-30 22:24:43.416445
2011-03-30 22:28:08.347467  <- registration is lost
2011-03-30 22:34:17.157207  <- registration is lost
2011-03-30 22:38:20.516552  <- registration is lost
2011-03-30 22:39:43.442408
2011-03-30 22:53:34.310673  <- registration is lost
2011-03-30 22:54:42.946209
2011-03-30 22:58:35.493782  <- registration is lost
2011-03-30 23:03:35.384904  <- registration is lost
2011-03-30 23:04:00.703835
2011-03-30 23:08:19.001001  <- registration is lost
2011-03-30 23:08:51.070312  <-   and why it's here?
2011-03-30 23:12:31.769667  <- registration is lost
2011-03-30 23:14:15.509180  
2011-03-30 23:14:15.829673  <-   why it's here again?
2011-03-30 23:16:43.406592  <- registration is lost
2011-03-30 23:19:15.780887  <- registration is lost
2011-03-30 23:21:52.441774  <- registration is lost
2011-03-30 23:22:49.058830

Of cause it will loose its registration, even if FreeSWITCH adds extra 1 minute 
over the  registration time sent by CSipSimple to it... :(

Please fix the bug!

@yok : can you produce CSipSimple logs. It's possible that 60 seconds proposed 
by CSipSimple are not accepted by the server and provide the client an higher 
value for re-registration timeout.

Regarding logs you get from the server CSipSimple re-register each 15 minutes. 
That's an exact value so I think this is due to the fact the client and the 
server agreed on this value. 
If you send me logs with the HowToCollectLogs methods I'll be able to say 
whether : 
1 - CSipSimple does not take into account your 60 s in re-registration timeout 
in expert wizard
2 - OR (more probable cause I tested the first one and still works) - Cause the 
SIP server actually say the sip client that the re-registration timeout will be 
900s. The value sent by the client is *just* a proposal. Then what the client 
should do is get the value from the registration response and re-register when 
this value expires.


Just one other point about that : "why it's here again?". Read the FAQ about "I 
receive calls twice / Registration is done on the sip server twice". That's a 
normal behavior.

@yok : just to be sure, once you save the account under expert mode, you do not 
then re-change wizard and save it to basic wizard mode? 
Cause if you do so, the basic wizard default settings will apply and the 
default 900 sec of re-registration timeout will apply...

Server (FreeSWITCH in this case) takes proposed time from CSipSimple seriously 
(it accepts whatever I set) and politely (it adds extra 60 sec, just to make 
sure that there is no problems with network traffic delays). I can see it on 
server's side checking the expiration time in its console. If in CSipSimple I 
set it to 60 sec, the server will wait for next 120 sec. If I set it to 3600, 
server will wait for next 3660 sec.

Tonight I've made a test and set "Register timeout (sec)" to 3600. Here is the 
log from server:
2011-03-31 00:22:58.596538
2011-03-31 01:23:12.238238
2011-03-31 02:26:41.855029  <- unregistered
2011-03-31 03:27:55.752253  <- unregistered
2011-03-31 04:28:00.569197
2011-03-31 05:31:40.218729  <- unregistered
2011-03-31 06:32:59.341218  <- unregistered
2011-03-31 07:37:56.104157  <- unregistered
2011-03-31 08:38:00.200000
2011-03-31 09:37:55.292088  <- unregistered
2011-03-31 09:42:24.363138  <- why ???
2011-03-31 09:42:24.643566  <- why ???
2011-03-31 10:42:21.475206
2011-03-31 11:42:33.336551

The phone was idle all the time... The total time when phone was unregistered 
is small, compared to the total measured time, but anyway - it's unacceptable.

As you can see sometimes it's sending its request, delayed 1 minute more then 
promised and sometimes it even sends several completely unnecessary requests in 
a row (in this test it was 3 times in a row)... The timer triggering 
registration is definitely not stable!

BTW, Sipdroid uses 3600 by default. And when I set CSipSimple to have 
registration time 3600 sec and then checked battery charge today morning - the 
charge was 95%. It's pretty much what I'm getting with Sipdroid.

Bottom line - I see the problem with timer that triggers register requests 
(it's not stable). It should be fixed, so CSipSimple is never late at sending 
register messages to server in time frame it promises.

----------------
I do all my tests in expert mode. And, BTW, if I set account back to "basic 
wizard" mode, I'd not expect my settings back to default 900 sec of 
registration timeout... :( Why is that? It may create unnecessary confusion. If 
I need to set everything to default values - I should be able to do so 
explicitly by some "Restore Defaults" action and not by simply changing the 
wizard. Wizard is just a way to simplify configuration (in cases if it's 
possible), but not the tool to reset my settings when I did not ask for it...

Can you send me logs from CSipSimple? 
With your logs I'm absolutely unable to understand what's actually happening.

There is many things that are done by pjsip that can be understood only with 
SIP packets under the eyes. Read the wiki page about multiple registration, 
you'll maybe have clues about why it may do multiple registrations.

CSipSimple relies on pjsip stack. This stack is widely used on other targets 
and is much much more complex than the sipdroid one. Also this re-registration 
thing take care of much more things than the sipdroid ones. There is mechanism 
to automatically detect NAT and things like that. It may introduce additional 
registrations (but can be configured).

I do test on sip servers and never get lost of registration. So as I'm not able 
to reproduce on my side *I really needs your csipsimple logs* else I'm really 
sorry but how do you want me to fix?

Besides, another things : CSipSimple is opensource and GPL... do you know that 
can have a look to the code too? 
I develop it on my own time; If you really want to have it fix for you and 
improve the software, why not just diving in the code ;)? In opensource 
projects it's users that make the software. If nobody helps and rely on the 
main contributor, crying without helping, he will be tired one day ;).
You say me : the app is crappy, "it's unacceptable"... 
Hey guy, it's not a professional app. Do you pay something for the app? Do I 
ask you for something when using the app? If you want support you have two 
choices :
You can choose the opensource way, accept to spend time to help the community 
to debug and provide more infos than just "Fix this bug". 
Or you can choose a commercial app. Just cry against the support of this 
company that provide crappy thing. And they'll pay full time guys to just try 
to reproduce your issue on a lab and to understand what's going wrong and 
provide you a patch (one day).

Keep in mind, CSipSimple is a young project. It relies entirely on the 
community and on constructive feedback.

---
As for your last remark. Well, I hesitated long time before choosing this 
behavior. 
You are thinking just about a switch from expert to basic but I have to think 
about switch from a sip provider to a generic. Also a wizard must be 
consistant. I think that it can be equally confusing to have a wizard applying 
different hidden settings regarding to what you did previously. If you want to 
change a setting, you must have access to it in the wizard you are editing it. 
I think that your remark is just a point of view. And that in the absolute both 
approach could be equally confusing for an user. The thing that make me choose 
this approach is to be able to have a consistent way to edit a wizard. 
For example you setup a sipgate account, then transform it to expert, change 
the registrar, and then re-transform it to sipgate account. What do you expect? 
Keeping the registrar you changed?? I think that's a bad idea. You want it to 
be a sipgate account, it just apply sipgate settings.

Both of you, to each corner for a break, :-P

About the reset settings (that should be documented in another bug /wiki) i
was going to agree with the other user, but your explanation makes sense.
I'll stick with it

I think chances are Android tend to disconnect from time to time to save 
battery on some phones. It happens a lot and is observable on a couple of 
Android phones I have. If that's the case there is nothing cSipSimple can do.

FYI with my phone, CSipSimple consumes less battery than... Facebook.

battery on some phones.

Some ROMs do that! stock 2.3 in NS and 2.2 from HTC will kill data after 30
min

@r3gis:
> With your logs I'm absolutely unable to understand what's actually happening.

REGISTER request, which SIP client sends to SIP server, has "Expires" 
attribute. That attribute tells to the server for how long to keep client 
registered. For example, if "Expires: 300", then server should keep the client 
registered for the next 300 sec (5 min). If server will not receive next 
REGISTER request during that time - it will un-register the client.

Now, if we look at the log provided in Comment #68, we can see that client 
makes promises to send requests every hour (3600 sec). But time-to-time it 
fails to do so. For example, it sends request at 2011-03-31 01:23:12.238238. 
The next such request should be sent no later, then in 1 h, and particularly, 
at the 2011-03-31 02:23:12.238238. But CSipSimple fails to send it at that 
time. Instead, it sends its next request at 2011-03-31 02:26:41.855029. It's 
more then 3 min late. During these 3 minutes server considers the client 
unregistered (as it should, accordingly to SIP specs).

Log of timestamps, provided in my previous post, shows that loosing registered 
status happened several times during that session. In all such cases CSipSimple 
did not send its next REGISTER request as it promises to SIP server. 

But there is yet another problem - suddenly CSipSimple may send several 
REGISTER requests in a row during very short period of time. Here is example 
from the log above:
2011-03-31 09:37:55.292088
2011-03-31 09:42:24.363138  <- why ???
2011-03-31 09:42:24.643566  <- why ???

The question is - why it sends request at 09:42:24, when the previous request 
was send just about 5 min ago? And, after that it sends a third request in just 
about 300 msec. Why is that? It doesn't interrupt or brake registered status on 
server side (server will just restart its expiration time from the last 
request). But because it's unnecessary - it's a simple waste of battery charge 
(and bandwidth).

I hope that the long explanation provided above makes my point more clear. The 
problem is with timer, that triggers sending REGISTER requests. It is not 
properly implemented, otherwise CSipSimple would send REGISTER requests exactly 
at expiration time (no later or earlier)...

Just send the csipsimple logs like asked.

I just upgraded Android version from 2.1 to 2.2 (Froyo) on my Motorola 
Milestone. I always use latest nightly build of Csipsimple. I am using this 
phone only for making SIP calls. In earlier version, I never noticed fast 
drainage of battery because of CSipsimple but here in 2.2 ver., I feel that 
CSipsimple is consuming more battery. Any Solution please ? 

No problem for me more. Samsung Spica, Froyo 2.2.
I have disabled STUN, ICE (temporarily I think) and enabled "Use mode Audio 
API" in extended mode (helps release Spica's speaker after call).
But recently was CSIPSimple busyloop after 5 days of running (night build of 11 
April). Battery was hot, in CPU I just updated CSIPSimple, will see if this 
repeats.

I'm using PowerTutor app and it's showing that the radio is pulsing very 
frequently even when the I disabled all network answer & callout forms (GPRS, 
EDGE, 3G, Wifi...). Also closed the app via 'disconnect' option, and verified 
the service shut down in Settings > Applications > Running Services. The only 
way I could get the pulsing to stop was to toggle off/on the Data connection in 
Android Settings. There seems to be a bug somewhere.

@jayz : are you using the market version or the nightly build? The market 
version has known imperfections regarding battery usage that are fixed in 
nightly build.

I was using the market version, but just installed nightly build 822 and still 
the same issue.

Some other notes about the latest nightly build during my brief testing to a 
landline:

Noticed where double incoming calls would show up, and I can't answer either, 
or if I "throw away" one, it disconnects the call. I think I have to back out 
of the app completely instead of using the home key to escape to get rid of 
this problem. On the bright side the ringtone sound plays when the double 
incoming appears, but when single incoming call appears, ringtone is silent.

My Acer Liquid (android 2.2) has weak speakers for some reason and if I set the 
audio amplification to anything higher than 1.0, I get no audio at all. the mic 
gain I have to turn down to 0.5, otherwise if at 1.0 it gets staticky if my 
voice gets high.

About the double call : did you activate (or have the option active) Settings > 
Call settings > allow multiple calls? 
In fact when you are registered twice on a sip provider (which may occur if 
your sip provider does not fully respect sip standard or if the sip connection 
was not 'disconnected' by csipsimple (connection lost or app uninstall).
In this case your provider may call you twice. You should be able to answer by 
drag and droping one of the two calls on the upper part of the screen. (you'll 
have a missed call log in this case, but nothing hurting).

That's why I've introduced the allow multiple calls option, it's in order to 
prevent regression for users that already receive two calls from their sip 
provider but are saved thanks to the fact csipsimple did support only one call 
in previous releases.
Now the allow multiple calls should be disabled by default, and guys that 
enable it must be aware about the fact their sip provider has to support rfc 
correctly (or if not, csipsimple has to have the corresponding account 
configured to rewrite contact in legacy mode), and that in case of connection 
lost they can have this weird behavior.

HTC Desire HD, stock Android, CSipsimple version from Market.

Configured strictly for outgoing calls, all Android integration disabled (as 
it's certainly inconvenient to select transport every time when you make a 
call).

After a SIP call, the device lost ~50% of battery charge overnight, with 
partial wake usage 100%, due to CSipCall lock (judging by battery statistics).

Too bad there is no certain way just to switch everything off, completely stop 
the CSipSimple and forget about any potential issues (except for uninstalling, 
but install/uninstall every time to make a SIP call seems a bit impractical :) 
).

@dutyan : this one is fixed in nightly build version that will land soon on the 
android market.

Now that I got the echo thing resolved (issue 119), I am focusing on battery 
performance.  I use mostly over 3g.  From reading this thread, it seems that 
the main two parameters (since I'm mostly not using wifi) is the keep alive and 
the re-registration.  If I want to eliminate the keep alive for mobile, can I 
just set it to -1?

While the purpose of the keep alive is clear to me, what does register timeout 
and register delay before refresh (which is currently set to -1) do?  When the 
register timeout expires, does the client un-register, then re-register?  What 
is the purpose? 

About the keep alive thing : in fact no -1 will not disable it. There is no way 
to disable this in fact. An equivalent to disable it would be to set it to the 
time of registration timeout of you sip provider.
In fact the re-registration is done by pjsip (in C layer). Previously keep 
alive was also done in C layer. The problem is that C layer has no way to tell 
the CPU to wake up at regular interval. Only android java API allow that. 
In consequence I did hacks in pjsip code to disable their keep alive mechanism 
(which was per account), and replace by one managed in java part of the app.
As consquence the keep alive mechanism will not only be useful to send blank 
packets to the stream but also to wake up the cpu at regular interval. As 
consequence in worse case keep alive should be at least the value of the 
registration timeout.

About the "register delay before refresh". This is something that has been 
introduced by pjsip really recently. In fact it represent the time just before 
the renewal of the registration.
I'll take an example :
CSipSimple config : register timeout : 3000 sec & register delay before refresh 
: 10s
 * pjsip send register timeout when registering (say 3000 sec)
 * the server register the client and tell that finally this registration will be valid for 1800 sec
 * => pjsip will try to re-register in 1800 s - 10 s


In register delay before refresh -1 means to keep the default value of pjsip 
(it's 5s if I do not mistake).

Thanks, your example makes it very clear!

r3gis, I am sure that if I sent you a log file, you could determine the optimal 
(or at least reasonable) values to set for keep alive and register time out.  
But could you give a quick tutorial here (where everyone can see) of what to 
look for in the log file?  If it is too complicated, I will just send you a log 
file.

Running the latest v.0.02-00 from the market. 

I suppose that registration process should happen on a regular basis (and no 
more then it's being required). But here is example what I see in FreeSWITCH 
log:
2011-05-09 11:08:04.133718
2011-05-09 11:10:22.477473
2011-05-09 11:16:59.028847
2011-05-09 11:31:55.939492
2011-05-09 11:46:56.775483
2011-05-09 12:02:23.756731
2011-05-09 12:03:43.732958
2011-05-09 12:04:58.482242
2011-05-09 12:11:29.832046
2011-05-09 12:26:50.424808
2011-05-09 12:42:52.693418
2011-05-09 12:58:54.839573
2011-05-09 13:14:41.931381
2011-05-09 13:16:02.722050
2011-05-09 13:17:22.370872
2011-05-09 13:18:36.841319
2011-05-09 13:19:17.116459
2011-05-09 13:29:56.650829
2011-05-09 13:46:16.195421
2011-05-09 14:02:03.438599
2011-05-09 14:18:05.042140
2011-05-09 14:19:25.315967
2011-05-09 14:19:57.551677
2011-05-09 14:25:40.658197
2011-05-09 14:26:21.806545
2011-05-09 14:27:21.821645

Cell phone and SIP server was completely idle at the time of the test. All 
settings are default. Registration supposed to happen every 15 min (900 sec). 
But log above shows it's not the case...

Why registration is so irregular?

Obviously it leads to two problems:
1. drain move power (unnecessary frequent communications with server)
2. potential of loosing registration for a while (and it can't get incoming 
calls at that time)

Samsung Galaxy S, Froyo (2.2.1), no custom rom, csipsimple from android market,

Thank you very much for this little addon to android - very appreciated! It 
even works through an OpenVPN tunnel to my home router (unlike sipdroid).

But the battery drain is a big issue, even when all sip accounts are 
disconnected. Usually my phone looses 2% per ~8 hour night with all data 
connections disabled. With csipsimple running in background (no sip accounts 
connected) i lost ~30% power one night.

I use the app for outgoing calls only. So i would also prefer to have an option 
to shutdown csipsimple completely because i dont need an running background 
service for incoming calls/etc.

Workaround: for the time being i use "Bloat Freezer - Root" to 'freeze' 
csipsimple. 

@ber... : 
* did you try the 0.02-02? it should fix the crazy mode that drained battery.
* The option to shut down csipsimple is already available, press menu and 
disconnect... that's it :)

r3gis actually i've been meaning to talk to you about that: the Disconnect 
option stop working a few nightlies ago. it used to close the app, now it keeps 
running 

i installed the 0202 two(?) days ago. didnt have time to gather some 
'statistically reliable' data about the runtime til now ...
but i can confirm, the way ->menu ->disconnect didnt work for me - even with 
build 0202. battery loosing power much faster than without csip. and killing 
the service with a taskmanager is no solution: csipsimple restarts itself after 
a few minutes.

About menu > disconnect problem, that's strange I do not reproduce. What are 
your global setting on availability of csipsimple ? (always available? on wifi? 
for outgoing? and is the allowed over 3g activated?).

We should move this to a new bug.
I have always available, wifi and 3G, incoming and outgoing

I did a new build on nightly build website can you try and let me know if it 
helps with disconnect option?

932 trunk exits normally

for your information: integration into android dialer NO, outgoing connections 
only,3G allowed.

923 is installed and i'll monitor what happens after "disconnect" ...

thanks!

Unfortunately the fix of r932 has really bad side effects. So I reverted 
things. I open a new issue to track a clean fix for that point (issue 1066)

#88
> option to shut down csipsimple is already available, press menu and disconnect

Consider option to integrate with tasker (application) to allow it to kill 
CsipSimple by matching criteria like time of day or battery %

http://tasker.dinglisch.net/

there is still some unwanted activity in backround going on after 'disconnect'.
i am using the same config as before: NO integration into android dialer, 
outgoing only, 3G YES.
tonight i lost ~25% battery, while the expected drain without csipsimple was 
around 5-10% in that period.
later i looked into a taskmanager after using the phone a bit and csipsimple 
disappeared - ok ... then i came back to the phone after a while and when i got 
the unlock-screen to enter my pin (not my sim-card pin, phone did not restart 
in between), i saw "(s?)ip registered" coming up in the status bar.
i accessed csipsimple via status bar and had to re-enter the global settings on 
availability - my settings were lost!

About tasker integration, tasker just like locale, is not opensource software. 
I don't want to give an advantage to an non opensource software. As consquence 
I planned to do something for this stuff. Both locale and tasker use the same 
API. As consequence I'll soon create a new project that is an opensource 
alternative to this closed source application. Then it will be possible to use 
my new project or tasker or locale with a new plugin for CSipSimple. But it 
took time because I have to create this new alternative to these closed source 
programs.

About the loose of settings, another users had this problem too. 
It was cause he used a buggy alternative ROM (and when he migrated settings of 
apps before migration was duplicated in two places). You should search on the 
issue list (even on closed issue), he explained how to solve the problem. Could 
also be linked to how and where the app is installed on your android system. 
Actually CSipSimple use very basic feature of android system on settings so if 
you loose settings that's more likely cause android os do something weird with 
preference database.
(Could also be linked to the backup/restore feature, did you use it?) If you 
want to follow up, maybe worth to open an new issue about this point.

the disappearing settings can be related to a known bug on samsungs 2.2.1, 
where some apps cannot save their values. thanks for that hint. i did use the 
restore feature - but thats not the topic here and not so important for me now.

csipsimple got unloaded from androids memory after disconnect (no csip in 
taskmanager anymore), but why does it restart itself later on? i guess there is 
a runnning service which causes the battery drain and restarts the app.
i would really like to have an option to shut down csipsimple completely. or am 
i the only one with this wish?