I now need to finish the test/example application.
When that's done, I'll upload. Might even be this weekend.
I've been working away. Got a wierd bug which is holding things up.
Prototypes
==
1. int socket_iocp_new( void **socket_iocp_state, size_t
read_buffer_size, void
From: Toby Douglass [EMAIL PROTECTED]
As it is, it's easy to support serial writes with IOCP, it's supporting
multiple concurrent writes which is awkward for a convenient-to-use API
over IOCP - and this I would think is absolutely required for some uses
of UDP sockets.
I haven't tried any
I'm adding support for IOCP writes.
I've realised, though, that if you issue a write on a socket which
currently has an outstanding reading, when the IOCP completes, you don't
immediately know which operation has completed.
Obviously I used the completion key.
Actually, that's wrong.
On a
I wrote:
On a related note, did someone say that the event handle in the overlapped
structure used by the IO functions (ReadFile, etc) is not actually used?
If that's actually untouched, I could use it for my own purposes. The
alternative is probably a malloc() per write operation :-/
As it
I wrote:
As it is, it's easy to support serial writes with IOCP, it's supporting
multiple concurrent writes which is awkward for a convenient-to-use API
over IOCP - and this I would think is absolutely required for some uses of
UDP sockets.
I've figured out a decent way of doing it, a
Rhythmic Fistman wrote:
I don't think you should be passing the same overlapped structure
twice to WSARecv/Send. I'm pretty sure that the overlapped isn't
yours until GetQueuedCompletionStatus says so. Try a unique
overlapped structure for each overlappable call.
Don't worry, I'm not re-using
Rhythmic Fistman wrote:
From: Toby Douglass [EMAIL PROTECTED]
If that's actually untouched, I could use it for my own purposes. The
alternative is probably a malloc() per write operation :-/
You shouldn't have to touch that stuff. What are you trying to do?
Keep state on a per read/write
Rhythmic Fistman wrote:
On 2/22/07, Toby Douglass [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yup. I'll be passing in a struct which contains that overlapped as its
first member. When it comes back to be, I'll cast the overlapped
pointer to my struct type. I think this means though I need a malloc
per write
Okay, getting some work done.
You'll be amused to know that I've now moved away from the VC build
environment (although obviously still using the MS Platform SDK and
compilers) and I'm using gnumake and a makefile :-)
I found when I learned kernel development that the process of requiring
a
My graphics card died Saturday afternoon, so I've not been able to finish
the IOCP stuff.
Next weekend, hopefully.
___
Libevent-users mailing list
Libevent-users@monkey.org
http://monkey.org/mailman/listinfo/libevent-users
Kevin Sanders wrote:
On 12/10/06, Toby Douglass [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've not added support for writes, because I
think people generally issue blocking writes, since non-blocking means
that if you return from a function which issues a send you have to
ensure the lifetime of the buffer
Zhu Han wrote:
I have made some mistake when I type the above words. I just mean you
should
issue socket_internal_iocp_read firstly and then let the callbacks to
consume the data. However, in your code, you invoke the callbacks before
socket_internal_iocp_read. See the following snippet:
Kevin Sanders wrote:
I haven't looked at you're code yet, sorry I don't know the function
names. I'm referring to when the IOCP thread calls GQCS and sees the
read completion, it calls a read completion callback I believe? If
someone made a blocking call from this callback (the callback is
For those of you who are interested, I'm finishing off a rewrite of the
IOCP code, such that is handles connect()/accept() behaviour.
Which is to say, you init the IOCP state, and all your socket behaviour is
then routed through the callback function, which is simply called when an
accept,
Gordon Scott wrote:
One technical note; I believe that I/O completion ports cannot handle
accept() type behaviour,
What do you mean by this?
With an IOCP, you can give the IOCP a *connected* socket and the IOCP
will call you back when a read occurs.
But you cannot pass in an *unconnected*
The docs say the following functions can be used with an IOCP;
ConnectNamedPipe
DeviceIoControl
LockFileEx
ReadDirectoryChangesW
ReadFile
TransactNamedPipe
WaitCommEvent
WriteFile
Use AcceptEx.
The docs sayeth;
The following functions can be used to start I/O operations that complete
Kevin Sanders wrote:
Use AcceptEx.
Interesting. In the AcceptEx() docs, we find this; As with all
overlapped Windows functions, either Windows events or completion ports
can be used as a completion notification mechanism.
___
Libevent-users mailing
Hi.
I've written a tiny library which provides a simple front end for IO
completion ports.
The ultimate purpose of this is to provide excellent socket handling
under Win32 in libevent so that the socket problem Tor faces is solved.
My code base is written around a resource and error handling
Kalin Nakov wrote:
Hi,
I saw that libevent has some .dsp and .dsw files, but the sources are
completely unbuildable. First HAVE_CONFIG is not defined in the project,
also some WIN32 defines are re-defined in the code, some types are
undefined
and have to be manually defined, functions are used
Roger Clark wrote:
Has there ever been any mention of using IOCP or something on Windows?
The Win32 implementation currently uses select() and still imposes the
limit, which was mainly why I was asking.
I've written IOCP code. It's in the hands of another list reader to get
some testing; I'm
Kevin Sanders wrote:
On 10/31/06, Toby Douglass [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is with MaxUserPort set to 2 (decimal), although I've not
rebooted...
Best hope for this to work is rebooting after changing the setting.
Yup. Getting between 8200 and 8600 sockets now, with the server
Gordon Scott wrote:
Unfortunately the code belongs to my employer so I can't share it,
but (as Toby says it's late ) I can give you a general gist of the way it
works tomorrow.
Also if you can provide the code you have I can take a look and see if I
see any glaring errors.
Thankyou - that
This is for those of you who've done some IO completion port work.
According to my reading of the docs, GetQueuedCompletionStatus has four
return status';
---
1. return value != 0
- all went well, we've just returned from a successful dequeuing
2. return value != 0 and lpOverlapped ==
Kevin Sanders wrote:
Now, the problem is this: ERROR_SUCCESS is #defined as zero!
In other words, I don't think it's possible to differentiate between
case 3 and 4, because in case 3, *lpNumberOfBytes might be 0 just by
chance.
Call GetLastError().
I could be wrong, but I don't think that
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It's pretty spectacular stuff, I had a fairly average xp box doing 10k sockets
(through an external interface, no cheatingly going through localhost)
Did you get to 10k+ sockets in your first effort, or did you have to
tweak the OS config?
Ycrux wrote:
Hi Gordon and Toby!
I'm interested to test your code.
Could you please share it with us?
Bed time now.
Will post code to list tomorrow morning.
___
Libevent-users mailing list
Libevent-users@monkey.org
So, I've written an API to use IO completion ports.
It's very simple - far easier than the framework necessary to handle
multiple threads and WaitForMultipleObjects().
The API is;
new_iocp()
delete_iocp()
add_socket()
Currently, there's one callback function for all sockets. When the
callback
I've almost finished code to handle arbitrary numbers of sockets under
Win32 using WaitForMultipleObjects(). I expected to complete with one
more weekend of work and then move to test.
I've written the code from scratch last weekend.
There's a socket object, a listen thread object and a listen
28 matches
Mail list logo
