Re: AF_UNIX status report

[Corinna Vinschen <corinna-cygwin@cygwin.com>]

On Oct 26 18:04, Ken Brown via Cygwin-developers wrote:
> I've made at least rudimentary implementations of all the
> fhandler_socket_unix functions (including those in select.cc) for which
> there were previously only placeholders.
> 
> I've pushed everything to topic/af_unix, including a merge with master as of
> a couple days ago.
> 
> I've cobbled together a few test programs and put them in
> winsup/cygwin/socket_tests on the topic/af_unix branch.  I haven't taken the
> time to automate the tests, so they all have to be run interactively.  There
> is a Makefile to build the test programs and a README.txt that shows how to
> run them.
> 
> One thing I haven't yet done is to think about (or systematically test)
> datagram sockets.  I'm sure there's quite a bit of code that won't work for
> them.
> 
> Aside from datagram sockets, there are still a few things that I'm working
> on, but I'm close to the point where I could use some input:
> 
> 1. I've littered the code in fhandler_socket_unix.cc and select.cc with
> FIXME comments on which I'd like advice.

I'll look into it.

> 2. I haven't given any thought at all as to how to implement SCM_RIGHTS
> ancillary data.  I could definitely use suggestions on that before I start
> thrashing around.

I have only vague ideas at that point.  Assuming we can replace the
socket implemantation with the pipe implementation, what we have is a
pipe which can impersonate the peer at least from the server side, and
it knows the client process.  This in turn can be used to duplicate
handles.  So what we could do is to define fhandler methods which create
a matching serialization  and deserialization of the fhandler data, plus
duplicating the handles for the other process, sent over the pipe as
admin package.  This must work in either direction, regardless if the
server or the client sends the SCM_RIGHTS block.


Corinna