[nanomsg] Re: towards a more robust socket model
- From: Martin Sustrik <sustrik@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: nanomsg@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2014 17:01:48 +0100
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 16/11/14 08:51, Drew Crawford wrote:
> * There has been months of discussion and a failed patch regarding
> #324 <https://github.com/nanomsg/nanomsg/issues/324>
I've added a test to inproc.c which looks like this:
/* Check whether SP message header is transferred correctly. */
sb = test_socket (AF_SP_RAW, NN_REP);
test_bind (sb, SOCKET_ADDRESS);
sc = test_socket (AF_SP, NN_REQ);
test_connect (sc, SOCKET_ADDRESS);
test_send (sc, "ABC");
iovec.iov_base = body;
iovec.iov_len = sizeof (body);
hdr.msg_iov = &iovec;
hdr.msg_iovlen = 1;
hdr.msg_control = &control;
hdr.msg_controllen = NN_MSG;
rc = nn_recvmsg (sb, &hdr, 0);
errno_assert (rc == 3);
cmsg = NN_CMSG_FIRSTHDR (&hdr);
while (1) {
nn_assert (cmsg);
if (cmsg->cmsg_level == PROTO_SP && cmsg->cmsg_type == SP_HDR)
break;
cmsg = NN_CMSG_NXTHDR (&hdr, cmsg);
}
nn_assert (cmsg->cmsg_len == 8);
data = NN_CMSG_DATA (cmsg);
nn_assert (!(data[0] & 0x80));
nn_assert (data[4] & 0x80);
nn_freemsg (control);
test_close (sc);
test_close (sb);
And it seems to work OK. Can you check whether the problem persists?
And if so, can you make a test program to reproduce?
Martin
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJUaMprAAoJENTpVjxCNN9YFncH/3WN+rPP2ZHlaausP9hH+Y/r
9Abdjoc3CITWXQ5Tr7suLnI0+vS1ZCBuIfqfvpQQ3Btvb2haDEcVg2HiwDoB7yKt
6io+CTmu4tk3SGeR6iFTAbHRyCopfbIbvJArirDJG4Wsu7gqXgU2QWpGS8BkDcPV
zb5AioMNfblj2SFZYzNDQMT2fyUWmCHlvBN7Ob7AgJkShE8cJcuPUxhWwtiyaFHG
kcIcwSVdkZfTxu4Acp/STtMWoZrWqlcPbpRbfunBjfQnj6/YruZcP7tDV1qipnoz
R2Y9xq9+tOhX2+Klb1R+BgdgAnwGoSfuqgHhv5MJmQZ7/WAcmDAcrwyd4rKeM/M=
=ls07
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Other related posts:
