The unreliability of AF_UNIX datagram sockets
Ken Brown
kbrown@cornell.edu
Mon May 3 20:50:43 GMT 2021
On 5/3/2021 3:48 PM, Ken Brown wrote:
> On 5/3/2021 2:40 PM, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>> On May 3 12:56, Ken Brown wrote:
>>> On 5/3/2021 11:45 AM, Corinna Vinschen wrote:
>>>> 7. The idea of _mq_recv partial reads is entirely broken. Given that
>>>> the information in the queue consists of header info plus payload,
>>>> the entire block has to be read, and then a new block with fixed
>>>> header and shortened payload has to be rewritten with bumped priority.
>>>> This in turn can only be performed by the AF_UNIX code, unless we
>>>> expect knowledge of the AF_UNIX packet layout in the mqueue code.
>>>
>>> The partial read is actually OK as is, since it's comparable to what happens
>>> on a partial read from a pipe. I already have AF_UNIX code (on the
>>> topic/af_unix branch) that deals with that. A boolean variable _unread
>>> keeps track of whether there's unread data from a previous partial read. If
>>> so, the next read just reads data without expecting a header.
>>
>> Ok, never mind.
>>
>> One advantage of the mqueue when utilized as above would be that this
>> kind of state info is not required. The content of a packet would
>> always be self-contained and bumping the priority would automagically
>> move the packet content to the top of the queue. But that's just
>> idle musing at this point.
>
> I thought about that but rejected it for the following reason: Suppose the
> receiver reads a message and tries to rewrite it with modified header, shortened
> payload, and bumped priority. The sender might have already written more
> messages between the read and the write, and the queue could be full.
>
> Now that I'm rethinking this, however, maybe we could get around that problem
> with an internal _mq_lock function that would block senders while the receiver
> decides whether it needs to do a partial read.
Alternatively, _mq_recv could accept an _MQ_LOCK flag, which means "don't
release the mutex", and then there could be an _mq_unlock function, which simply
releases the mutex.
Ken
More information about the Cygwin-developers
mailing list