[Bug 17195] New: NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

           Summary: NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams
           Product: Wine
           Version: unspecified
          Platform: Other
        OS/Version: other
            Status: UNCONFIRMED
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P2
         Component: ntdll
        AssignedTo: wine-bugs(a)winehq.org
        ReportedBy: lkcl(a)lkcl.net


ok, after a little bit of investigation, i think i understand the pipes code
enough to be able to say what's going on, and i'm seeing something like this:

process 1:

recvpipe = CreateNamedPipe("\\pipe\fred")
ReadFile(recvpipe, buffer, &length);
printf(length) ===> 43
ReadPipe(recvpipe, buffer, &length); /* no data */

process 2:

sendpipe = CreateNamedPipe("\\pipe\fred")
length = 9;
WriteFile(sendpipe, buffer, &length);
length = 34;
WriteFile(sendpipe, buffer, &length);


what's happening is that the data being sent down the pipes isn't being done as
datagrams.  the implementation is using a stream-based fd.

the solution is: you _must_ implement a protocol on top of the pipes which
sends the length (as a 32-bit int, whatever) which is read off the fd, followed
by the data stream of _exactly_ that length.

_must_.  there's no two ways about this.

the protocol of Pipes is unfortunately a combination of both datagrams and
streams.  datagrams because the lengths of data sent are absolute and
inviolate.  streams because the data order and reliability are _also_ absolute
and inviolate.

you can't use datagrams (because they're unreliable).  you can't expect all
unixen to support datagrams on top of unix sockets (if that's what's being
used).

so - you have to send the length, as part of the implementation of the
pipe-data-send.

sending a length will also solve the issue of trying to send zero-length pipe
datagrams.

as a first implementation, you _might_ be able to get away with assuming that
when someone asks for some data, they _will_ provide a buffer big enough.

... actually... i don't see any ERR_MORE_DATA error codes in NtReadFile, so
that would explain... this is going to get messy :)


-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195


Juan Lang <juan_lang(a)yahoo.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|UNCONFIRMED                 |NEW
     Ever Confirmed|0                           |1




--- Comment #1 from Juan Lang <juan_lang(a)yahoo.com>  2009-01-30 12:32:43 ---
This is a longstanding bug in our named pipe implementation.  We never got
around to fixing it because a) it's harder than not doing so, and b) we hadn't
yet found an app that needed it.

Do the python tests depend on this being correct?


-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195





--- Comment #2 from Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <lkcl(a)lkcl.net>  2009-01-30 14:05:10 ---
(In reply to comment #1)
> This is a longstanding bug in our named pipe implementation.  We never got
> around to fixing it because a) it's harder than not doing so, and b) we hadn't
> yet found an app that needed it.

well, there are two.  one exists - python 2.7 - the new multithreading module
uses named pipes in message mode - and messages are used to exchange a
digest-based authentication across processes, as a cheap way of not checking
the security context.  the exchange is interfered with by the first _actual_
bit of data that needs to be sent being "glommed" onto the end of the last part
of the authentication exchange.

so instead of 9 bytes being read "#SUCCESS#", 43 bytes are read -
"#SUCCESS#firstpacket....." and thus it all goes pear-shaped.

the second one app - that doesn't yet exist - is for named pipe integration
with samba.  Named Pipes over SMB allow MessageMode to be set.  the DCE/RPC
layer (ncacn_np) _definitely_ sets MessageMode.

i saw well over 8mb of data being exchanged over one "message", at hp.  they
had well over 2,000 printers on one domain.  it took _forever_ to complete the
transfer (order n-squared) because some idiot in microsot implemented
"ERR_MORE_DATA" over an MSRPC interface in the spoolss service.  so it first
asked for 64k, then 128k, then 192k .... all the way up to 8mb!!!

all using NamedPipes. yeuuch :)
> Do the python tests depend on this being correct?

oh yeah.  the entire multiprocessing infrastructure now depends critically on
this working correctly.  they're moving away from the posix implementation of
popen(), and also moving away from all sorts of other bunged-up stuff.  all in
the new module "multiprocessing" which abstracts out pipe communication,
forking, threading, messaging, inter-process communication, all this lovely
stuff.

it's already become a major part of the python infrastructure for 2.7 and 3.0,
so it's a bit of a big deal that this works.


-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195





--- Comment #3 from Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <lkcl(a)lkcl.net>  2009-01-31 05:19:15 ---
Created an attachment (id=19121)
 --> (http://bugs.winehq.org/attachment.cgi?id=19121)
start of test app for messagemode

ok, you start this with:
./msrpcd.exe
or if you want a single run:
./msrpcd.exe -p pipename

and then, client-side:
./msrpc.exe -p pipename -t testname

where the two tests so far are test1 and send2recv2

test1 is the simple send 1 recv 1 send 1 recv 1

send2recv2 as its name suggests sends 2 messages and then waits to receive 2.

but, due to the bug in messagemode, it only receives one, of total size of the
glomming of both messages.

debug output.  exit code is 1 on failure.

msrpcd.exe will run continuously, default pipe name "test", if you get bored of
re-running it all the time.

internally, msrpcd.exe will create a new process, and back-to-back proxy the
data between the "front" msrpcd.exe and the "child" msrpcd.exe over a unique
pipe named after the thread-id.

i didn't cut this code out because i thought it would be useful, later.

it's not particularly well-written - there are better ways (such as use of
DupHandle and other stuff) but hey, it was my first experiment with NamedPipes
and i'm proud of it :)


-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195


Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <lkcl(a)lkcl.net> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Attachment #19121|0                           |1
        is obsolete|                            |




--- Comment #4 from Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <lkcl(a)lkcl.net>  2009-01-31 09:15:29 ---
(From update of attachment 19121)
extra test (short read)


-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195





--- Comment #5 from Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <lkcl(a)lkcl.net>  2009-01-31 09:19:59 ---
Created an attachment (id=19124)
 --> (http://bugs.winehq.org/attachment.cgi?id=19124)
added short read test

ok, this extra test is called shortread:
./msrpcd.exe &
./msrpc.exe -t shortread

it demonstrates that "short read" is actually very straightforward to
implement.  both ReadFile and PeekNamedPipe return the number of bytes
requested - _if_ any are requested, and ERROR_MORE_DATA is returned if there
are bytes remaining. the difference between ReadFile and PeekNamedPipe is that
two extra params are tacked on the end: available and remaining.  both are
pointers and the sums should be:

read_this_time + remaining == available.

i need to do another test which does a short read using PeekNamedPipe followed
by a ReadFile, to confirm that absolutely.


-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195





--- Comment #6 from Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <lkcl(a)lkcl.net>  2009-01-31 15:21:33 ---
Created an attachment (id=19132)
 --> (http://bugs.winehq.org/attachment.cgi?id=19132)
beginnings of messagemode

this isn't ready for committing but i'm looking for advice on
how best to proceed - i've duplicated a function in two places
(kernel32 and ntdll) because i don't know where to put it;
the set_named_pipe_info server function is not receiving
the "availdata" info - or if it is, it's getting overwritten
and i don't exactly know how.

but - this _does_ pass the send2recv2 test!

just not the shortread one which does PeekNamedPipe(),
that's where it goes a bit wrong.


-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195


Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <lkcl(a)lkcl.net> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Attachment #19132|0                           |1
        is obsolete|                            |




--- Comment #7 from Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <lkcl(a)lkcl.net>  2009-02-01 04:27:47 ---
Created an attachment (id=19145)
 --> (http://bugs.winehq.org/attachment.cgi?id=19145)
passes all 3 tests

ok, the last thing that i missed, as of last night, was filling
in the message size field in PeekNamedPipe - that was all :)
so, now this patch passes all three tests!


-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195


Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <lkcl(a)lkcl.net> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Attachment #19124|0                           |1
        is obsolete|                            |




--- Comment #8 from Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <lkcl(a)lkcl.net>  2009-02-02 13:25:27 ---
Created an attachment (id=19215)
 --> (http://bugs.winehq.org/attachment.cgi?id=19215)
4th test - threadread

this is running a writer-thread and a reader-thread; 50 messages
are sent, of 512 bytes each.  short reads of 16 bytes are used
to retrieve each message.
this test generally making things keel over quite badly :)
xp also gets pretty unhappy if you increase the number of messages to 500.
there's a limit you can set, somewhere, i believe.  haven't found it yet.


-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195





--- Comment #9 from Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <lkcl(a)lkcl.net>  2009-02-04 09:39:21 ---
fascinating.

a test i'm writing - threadwrites - has the main process doing blocking-reads,
and there are 5 threads doing writes.  the test _hangs_ on NT.

writes in threads can never be performed at the same time as there's a blocking
read outstanding.


-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195


Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <lkcl(a)lkcl.net> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Attachment #19145|0                           |1
        is obsolete|                            |
  Attachment #19215|0                           |1
        is obsolete|                            |




--- Comment #10 from Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <lkcl(a)lkcl.net>  2009-02-04 12:14:34 ---
Created an attachment (id=19240)
 --> (http://bugs.winehq.org/attachment.cgi?id=19240)
5th test - threadwrite

this is a multi-threaded-writer test.  several threads
can be made to write on the same pipe handle, and there
is only one reader.  the number of messages sent and
received are counted, and the data sent is checked to
be correctly received.

it's using CreateThread() not _beginthread() due to
a bug in nt with the msvcrt function, _beginthread(),
which blocks indefinitely on multi-threaded read/write
interaction!


-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195


Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <lkcl(a)lkcl.net> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Depends on|                            |17263




-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195


Juan Lang <juan_lang(a)yahoo.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |juan_lang(a)yahoo.com




--- Comment #11 from Juan Lang <juan_lang(a)yahoo.com>  2009-02-05 15:12:51 ---
I tried building and running this here.  I modified Makefile to use winegcc
rather than '/usr/local/bin/wine gcc.exe'.  I then tried:

$ ./msrpcd -p mypipe

That produced this output:
open_server_pipe: \\.\pipe\mypipe
open_server_pipe succeeded

I then ran:
$ ./msrpc -p mypipe -t test1

The server produced this output:
Named Pipe connected
msrpcd_process: connection received
not ok 0x1c error 6d
not ok 0x1c error 6d

The client produced this output:
ncalrpc_l_establish_connection: connecting to .[mypipe]
Opening pipe \\.\pipe\mypipe
SetNamedPipeHandleState failedncalrpc_l_establish_connection: failed mypipe)
connection failed
msrpc_send: data: 0x7c703698 len 17
sent data failed

Is this what you expect would happen under Wine?  What would happen under
Windows?

Updated instructions, expected results, etc. would help.  Thanks!


-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195





--- Comment #12 from Juan Lang <juan_lang(a)yahoo.com>  2009-02-05 15:14:09 ---
Oh, I forgot to say, I also modified msrpc.c.  I removed the #include
<process.h>, and changed the _beginthread to CreateThread, and changed the
_sleep to Sleep.  If that's a problem let me know ;-)


-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195





--- Comment #13 from Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <lkcl(a)lkcl.net>  2009-02-05 15:30:16 ---
hiya juan,

msrpc.exe exits with a code of 1 in all instances of failure, and 0 on success,
so that it can be run from automated shell scripts.

the _very_ first clue is this:

"SetNamedPipeHandleState failed"

if you look at the current implementation of SetNamedPipeHandleState, it's
this:

BOOL WINAPI SetNamedPipeHandleState(
    HANDLE hNamedPipe, LPDWORD lpMode, LPDWORD lpMaxCollectionCount,
    LPDWORD lpCollectDataTimeout)
{
   return FALSE; /* FIXME */
}

so at almost the _very_ first hurdle, the current code in wine is wrong :)

the return result from this function must be TRUE not FALSE.

if you modify just that one line, then you will get wine to at least pass
"test1".  from there-on, all the other tests are guaranteed to fail.


-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195


Juan Lang <juan_lang(a)yahoo.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Depends on|                            |17273




-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195





--- Comment #14 from Juan Lang <juan_lang(a)yahoo.com>  2009-02-05 16:05:44 ---
(In reply to comment #13)
> "SetNamedPipeHandleState failed"

Roger that, I created 17273 to track that error, and I'll try to write up some
Alexandre-acceptable test cases for that function.


-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195





--- Comment #15 from Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <lkcl(a)lkcl.net>  2009-02-06 04:02:26 ---
well, this is the implementation i have so far:

/***********************************************************************
 *           SetNamedPipeHandleState  (KERNEL32.@)
 */
BOOL WINAPI SetNamedPipeHandleState(
    HANDLE hNamedPipe, LPDWORD lpMode, LPDWORD lpMaxCollectionCount,
    LPDWORD lpCollectDataTimeout)
{
    /* should be a fixme, but this function is called a lot by the RPC
     * runtime, and it slows down InstallShield a fair bit. */
    TRACE("%p %p/%d %p %p\n",
          hNamedPipe, lpMode, lpMode ? *lpMode : 0,
          lpMaxCollectionCount, lpCollectDataTimeout);

    if (lpMode)
    {
        /* FIXME: This function should fail if PIPE_READMODE_MESSAGE
         * is specified for a byte-type pipe.
         * TODO: write a test that deliberately tries this on nt,
         * to find out the error code.
         */
        int flgs = 0;
        if ((*lpMode) & PIPE_READMODE_MESSAGE)
        {
            /* FIXME: the current "are we in message-mode" is based
             * on NAMED_PIPE_MESSAGE_STREAM_WRITE being set, but
             * this is READMODE being asked to be set - why?
             */
            flgs |= NAMED_PIPE_MESSAGE_STREAM_READ;
        }
        if ((*lpMode) & PIPE_NOWAIT)
        {
            flgs |= NAMED_PIPE_NONBLOCKING_MODE;
        }
        server_set_named_pipe_info( hNamedPipe,
                                       NAMED_PIPE_INFO_SET_FLAGS,
                                       flgs, 0 );
        return TRUE;
    }
    return TRUE; /* FIXME: ignore all but lpMode setting, for now */
}


-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195





--- Comment #16 from Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <lkcl(a)lkcl.net>  2009-02-07 08:39:25 ---
tests TODO:

1) thread multiwrite, thread multiread.

  this test will show whether it's possible to have multiple concurrent readers
and writers at the _same_ time.  i.e.:

  wth-1 : write starts (e.g. 2mb of data)
  wth-2 : write starts (e.g. 2mb of data)
  rth-1 : read starts whilst wth-1 and wth-2 are still writing.
  rth-2 : read starts of SECOND message whilst wth-1 and wth-2 are still
          writing, and rth-1 is still reading message number 1.

2) start off in non-message-mode and switch to message-mode with data still
unread

 this test will be interesting.  basically, the SetNamedPipeHandleState is to
be delayed until a few messages have been exchanged, and some data left in the
pipe. a special focus will be on determining whether the data already in the
pipe is:

  a) thrown away
  b) "turned into" a message-mode message
  c) prepended to the next message that's written.

3) start off in message-mode and switch to non-message-mode with data
outstanding and not outstanding, as two separate tests.

4) do a CreateNamedPipe in message-mode on server-end and don't set
message-mode on the client, and see what happens

5) do a CreateNamedPipe _not_ in message-mode on server-end, and set
message-mode on the server, and see what happens.

6) more - yet to be thought of.


-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195





--- Comment #17 from Juan Lang <juan_lang(a)yahoo.com>  2009-02-07 19:23:53 ---
(In reply to comment #16)
> 2) start off in non-message-mode and switch to message-mode with data still
> unread

I believe this isn't allowed.  See the existing tests,
dlls/kernel32/tests/pipe.c, lines 213-214:
    /* trying to change the client end of a byte pipe to message mode should
fail */
    ok(!SetNamedPipeHandleState(hFile, &lpmode, NULL, NULL), "Change mode\n");

On the other hand, it's possible that these tests only test the client. 
Perhaps the server can change modes?  I suspect not, but you're right that a
test is needed.
> 3) start off in message-mode and switch to non-message-mode with data
> outstanding and not outstanding, as two separate tests.

I believe this is possible, at least for the client, in contrast to test 2).  I
don't believe there are tests for this though.


-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195





--- Comment #18 from Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <lkcl(a)lkcl.net>  2009-02-08 09:57:49 ---
Created an attachment (id=19335)
 --> (http://bugs.winehq.org/attachment.cgi?id=19335)
progress so far

work-in-progress, provided in case anyone's interested.
being absolutely honest, it's fairly horrendous! :)

the infrastructure is in place to create, on each messagemode write,
another socketpair, but is disabled for now (line 1804 of server/named_pipe.c)
as the socketpair needs to be closed when availdata == 0 (line 1665, TBD)
on a read, and in ntdll/file.c detection is required, if polling / waiting
for a read, for when a close occurs, to loop round and get another
filedescriptor.

so that's _definitely_ one for another day!

right now, i have at least test1 working, and, amazingly, shortread.

send2recv2 obviously fails due to the use of a single filedescriptor pair.

ironically, testing is actually taking place by having to watch the
\\pipe\\svcctl rpcrt4 interaction, not the tests!  named pipes are such a
fundamental part of wine now that ... ok, it would be _really_ helpful
if ncalrpc used lrpc not named pipes :)


-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195


Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <lkcl(a)lkcl.net> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
         Depends on|                            |17316




-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195


Bug 17195 depends on bug 17263, which changed state.

Bug 17263 Summary: missing expectation of ERROR_MORE_DATA status code in rpcrt4_conn_np_read
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17263

           What    |Old Value                   |New Value
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |RESOLVED
         Resolution|                            |FIXED



-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195





--- Comment #19 from Juan Lang <juan_lang(a)yahoo.com>  2009-02-11 12:19:08 ---
(In reply to comment #16)
> 2) start off in non-message-mode and switch to message-mode with data still
> unread

As I expected, this isn't allowed, either on the client end or server end of a
named pipe.  My tests that demonstrate it were sent in:
http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-patches/2009-February/069264.html
> 3) start off in message-mode and switch to non-message-mode with data
> outstanding and not outstanding, as two separate tests.

This, in contrast, is possible.  I haven't tested reading and writing in this
case, just that the API to switch modes succeeds.  See the above link.
> 4) do a CreateNamedPipe in message-mode on server-end and don't set
> message-mode on the client, and see what happens

Also possible.
> 5) do a CreateNamedPipe _not_ in message-mode on server-end, and set
> message-mode on the server, and see what happens.

Not possible.  See tests.


-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195


Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <lkcl(a)lkcl.net> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Attachment #19335|0                           |1
        is obsolete|                            |




--- Comment #20 from Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <lkcl(a)lkcl.net>  2009-02-12 04:59:15 ---
Created an attachment (id=19405)
 --> (http://bugs.winehq.org/attachment.cgi?id=19405)
passes test1

the monumental historic and epic battle to do correct named pipes
semantics wins a small victory: test1 is passed.
sadly that's the _only_ test passed so far but it's a start :)
i can't quite get over how horrendous the design is.


-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195


Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <lkcl(a)lkcl.net> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Attachment #19405|0                           |1
        is obsolete|                            |




--- Comment #21 from Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <lkcl(a)lkcl.net>  2009-02-14 11:39:20 ---
Created an attachment (id=19446)
 --> (http://bugs.winehq.org/attachment.cgi?id=19446)
nearly there!

amazing!  it's nearly there!
there is some sort of memory corruption going on after a
series of short reads (4 or more results in memory corruption).
if you shorten the number of reads, all five tests are passed!
it's almost there.


-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195





--- Comment #22 from Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <lkcl(a)lkcl.net>  2009-02-14 11:41:05 ---
to get a full quotes pass quotes, change line 197 #define MSG_SIZE 32
in msrpc.c test suite, and everything will work.
as soon as you up that to 64 or 128, splat.
no idea why, yet.


-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195





--- Comment #23 from Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <lkcl(a)lkcl.net>  2009-02-14 12:04:16 ---
Created an attachment (id=19449)
 --> (http://bugs.winehq.org/attachment.cgi?id=19449)
design / data structure document

here's a write-up of the design i had to do.
socketpairs have to be used in "simplex" NOT duplex.  if you try to use
a socketpair for both reading and writing.... err... how?  you have
ten messages written by client-to-server but only two written server-to-client,
how do you preserve message-mode semantics _and_ save a few socketpairs?
i don't want to think about how nasty the design would be - safer to
just use the socketpairs for a single purpose: write in only one of them,
and only read from the other.


-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195


Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <lkcl(a)lkcl.net> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Attachment #19449|application/x-pdf           |application/pdf
          mime type|                            |




-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195


Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <lkcl(a)lkcl.net> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Attachment #19446|0                           |1
        is obsolete|                            |




--- Comment #24 from Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <lkcl(a)lkcl.net>  2009-02-15 09:21:09 ---
Created an attachment (id=19474)
 --> (http://bugs.winehq.org/attachment.cgi?id=19474)
messagemode tests passed if BUF_SIZE reduced

this version successfully passes the tests _if_ you don't
ask it to hand out 200 filedescriptors.
also it looks like non-message-mode has been disrupted,
so will write some tests for that.

but - it works!


-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195


Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <lkcl(a)lkcl.net> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Attachment #19474|0                           |1
        is obsolete|                            |




--- Comment #25 from Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <lkcl(a)lkcl.net>  2009-02-15 12:10:46 ---
Created an attachment (id=19477)
 --> (http://bugs.winehq.org/attachment.cgi?id=19477)
messagemode tests passed if BUF_SIZE reduced

other than the insane numbers of file descriptors, and the excessive
amount of debug output, i'm happy with this.


-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195


Juan Lang <juan_lang(a)yahoo.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Attachment #19477|application/octet-stream    |text/plain
          mime type|                            |




-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195


Bug 17195 depends on bug 17316, which changed state.

Bug 17316 Summary: ncalrpc is using named pipes not lrpc
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17316

           What    |Old Value                   |New Value
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |RESOLVED
         Resolution|                            |WONTFIX



-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195





--- Comment #26 from Austin English <austinenglish(a)gmail.com>  2009-08-26 13:20:57 ---
Is this still present in current (1.1.28 or newer) wine?

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195





--- Comment #27 from Juan Lang <juan_lang(a)yahoo.com>  2009-08-26 15:23:45 ---
Yep, no change.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

Austin English <austinenglish(a)gmail.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
           Keywords|                            |download, patch, testcase

--- Comment #28 from Austin English <austinenglish(a)gmail.com> 2010-09-07 14:42:59 CDT ---
Still present.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

Dan Kegel <dank(a)kegel.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |adys.wh(a)gmail.com

--- Comment #29 from Dan Kegel <dank(a)kegel.com> 2011-03-22 16:54:38 CDT ---
*** Bug 26018 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

Dan Kegel <dank(a)kegel.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |dank(a)kegel.com

--- Comment #30 from Dan Kegel <dank(a)kegel.com> 2011-03-22 16:57:31 CDT ---
Ubisoft Launcher (Assassin's Creed brotherhood, etc.) is also said to
use named pipes.  Dunno if it uses message mode though.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

Berillions <berillions(a)gmail.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |berillions(a)gmail.com

--- Comment #31 from Berillions <berillions(a)gmail.com> 2011-03-23 02:11:37 CDT ---
The latest patch create by Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton doesn't work with the
latest version of wine (1.3.16) :
http://bugs.winehq.org/attachment.cgi?id=19477

I don't know how to do to modify the patch to resolv the problem...

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

James McKenzie <jjmckenzie51(a)gmail.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |jjmckenzie51(a)gmail.com

--- Comment #32 from James McKenzie <jjmckenzie51(a)gmail.com> 2011-03-27 18:34:38 CDT ---
@Luke:  Is it ok for someone else to pick up your code and update it to the
latest Wine development version?
@Juan:  What was the latest on this?  Was anything for this accepted by AJ?

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #33 from Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <lkcl(a)lkcl.net> 2011-03-27 18:53:59 CDT ---
it's free software, you don't need my permission :)

you do, however, need to take into account the fact that this is a severely
resource-hungry non-optimised solution which can in no way be put into a
production environment.

to properly solve this issue, i'm afraid that wine is going to need a quite
significant architectural "upgrade": wineserver must become multi-threaded.

this would also solve other quite serious and subtle bugs/issues including a
long-standing performance issue (in certain circumstances) across a broad range
of win32 applications.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

Dmitry Timoshkov <dmitry(a)codeweavers.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Component|ntdll                       |-unknown

--- Comment #34 from Dmitry Timoshkov <dmitry(a)codeweavers.com> 2011-03-28 00:51:00 CDT ---
(In reply to comment #33)
> this would also solve other quite serious and subtle bugs/issues including a
> long-standing performance issue (in certain circumstances) across a broad range
> of win32 applications.

Sounds like a pure speculation.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

Maarten Lankhorst <m.b.lankhorst(a)gmail.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |m.b.lankhorst(a)gmail.com

--- Comment #35 from Maarten Lankhorst <m.b.lankhorst(a)gmail.com> 2011-05-19 06:09:29 CDT ---
just curious, can you update it to current wine? Also it seems your patch
forgot to modify server/protocol.def which should be used to update other
related files with tools/make_requests

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #36 from Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <lkcl(a)lkcl.net> 2011-05-19 08:24:11 CDT ---
(In reply to comment #35)
> just curious, can you update it to current wine? Also it seems your patch
> forgot to modify server/protocol.def which should be used to update other
> related files with tools/make_requests

apologies, maarten - i can only do this if i am paid for my time to do so. 
with £25,000 of debt to repay, which is scheduled for repayment somewhere in
2036 (assuming that interest is zero), as well as having received income last
year of approximately £8,000 when i required £13,000 to cover all costs, you
can appreciate that doing "freebie" work, especially with having to also spend
time to deal with public and permanently-archived comments such as "you are
being incredibly lazy" and "that sounds like pure speculation", would be
unwise.

l.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

Alex Bradbury <asb(a)asbradbury.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |asb(a)asbradbury.org

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

LBM <knaprigt(a)gmail.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |knaprigt(a)gmail.com

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

Valentyn Pavliuchenko <valentyn.pavliuchenko(a)gmail.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |valentyn.pavliuchenko(a)gmail
                   |                            |.com

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #37 from Adam Martinson <adam.r.martinson(a)gmail.com> 2011-12-14 16:57:46 CST ---
Created attachment 37977
  --> http://bugs.winehq.org/attachment.cgi?id=37977
patch (work in progress)

Requires patches from bug 17273.  This approach may not work for named pipes
accessed over a network, I'd have to look into that more.

Any questions/advice/etc welcome.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #38 from Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <lkcl(a)lkcl.net> 2011-12-14 17:40:51 CST ---
adam, hi,

it's good to see someone finally working on this.  here's some notes on
what i discovered.

* the use of one socket per message, which was the only way to get
  the correct kind of blocking semantics, very very quickly exhausts
  the max number of open filedescriptors of any system.

* logically, therefore, the only way in which the correct blocking
  semantics (on a filedescriptor) can be achieved is also not a viable way.

* therefore, logically, there is no point in pursuing - by enhancement
  or otherwise - the approach taken in this demonstration patch which
  otherwise successfully and correctly implements proper namedpipe
  datagrams.

* therefore, logically, this has to be done correctly.

the correct way to do this is for the blocking semantics to be implemented
as a *userspace* service (running under wine).  it's to do with threads,
and the fact that the wine "server" is single-threaded, blocking, and
is designed around the "asynchronous" concept.

the alternative is a complete nightmare, requiring *everything* to do with
NamedPipes (networked or otherwise) to be *entirely* implemented as
"kernel-side" - i.e. asynchronous and single-threaded.

that includes services as well.

now, naively, that sounds all lovely and wonderful, until you go looking at
the asynchronous libsmb code in samba, which is of course GPL'd so it *cannot*
be used and would require complete reimplementation, and you find that it's
tens of thousands of lines of code.

there is a much simpler alternative: use *existing* synchronous libraries,
code and services - in fact you could simply modify samba (or better 
have a look at samba-tng which already has been ported to Win32) and *don't*
go reinventing the wheel.

howeverrrr... before you get there, you have to provide a means by which
client userspace applications can call into kernelspace, and for kernelspace
to call *back* to userspace [the alternative being to reimplement all
of said libraries and services as asynchronous code, in kernelspace].

if you've been following closely up until now, you may have an inkling of
what the problem is.

the problem is that when a wine userspace application calls a kernelspace
function call (e.g. WriteFile on a pipe), there's only one "thread",
kernel-side, and it permanently and completely blocks *all* and *any*
userspace applications until that quotes kernelspace quotes function
has been serviced.

in other words, if you passed the data on to another userspace application,
it would cause deadlock.

the solution is: to make wineserver multi-threaded.

this is, btw, unavoidable, absolutely essential, and it is inevitable that
wineserver _will_ have to be made multi-threaded.  denial of this fact will
only continue to result in obscure and inexplicable failures over the years,
inexplicable slow operation of wine under certain conditions, and so on.

now, the last time i described this, i was told, incredibly curtly and
very rudely, that "this was pure speculation" by dmitri (comment #34)

if i get that kind of shit treatment again, which is entirely unacceptable
in a free software environment, i will simply request that my account on
bugs.winehq.org be deleted, and you (plural) will never receive the benefit
of my advice or experience in this highly complex and specialist area, ever
again.

anyway.

you'll notice in NT documentation that several function calls are marked
as kernel-level blocking or otherwise.  it really is absolutely critical
for wineserver to mirror this behaviour.  it may be worthwhile seeing what
the ReactOS team have done.

also, given that wine is itself so fundamentally, fundamentally dependent
on NamedPipes, now, it really really is essential to implement a lrpc
namespace in ncalrpc, so that the fundamental services such as
\\pipe\\svcctl can operate unimpeded whilst development and testing is
taking place!  ncalrpc using the NamedPipe functions is *incorrect*.
the implementation of ncalrpc doesn't actually matter - it could be
a complete duplicate of the entire NamedPipe code right now just with
function call renames as long as it's fixed later (to also have correct
message-passing semantics).

so... lots to do, but this is all pretty low-level and critical stuff,
it's a credit to the implementation of wine that it's got this far
_without_ tackling these thorny issues :)

l.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #39 from Dan Kegel <dank(a)kegel.com> 2011-12-16 09:11:38 CST ---
Ubuntu has quadrupled the default limit on file descriptors since you
last checked, so running out of them might not be a problem now.

If you think we should ask them to double it again, now's a good time, while
11.10 is still alpha.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #40 from Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <lkcl(a)lkcl.net> 2011-12-16 12:16:02 CST ---
dan, apologies for not making this clearer: potentially hundreds of thousands
of file handles will be required.  this patch is NOT production-suitable, you
really do have to bite the bullet and fix wineserver properly.

this patch is for "demonstration purposes" ONLY and it would be a severe bug if
it were included, as it could be used to attack a system through resource
starvation simply by opening hundreds or thousands of NamedPipes and sending
hundreds or thousands of messages on each pipe.

sorry, dan - this is about limitations in the design of wine that simply
haven't had to be tackled up until now: it's now time to deal with them if wine
is to ever progress to the next level of interoperability.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #41 from Dan Kegel <dank(a)kegel.com> 2011-12-16 12:25:36 CST ---
Leaving aside integration with Samba, which won't happen for a while,
I don't see that an interim implementation of named pipes that
need two fd's per pipe would be any more vulnerable than the
current situation; you can already cause fd starvation if you realy
want to.

Something that get pass the python tests and made Asassin's Creed Brotherhood
work would be very nice, even if it wasn't sufficient for all purposes.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #42 from Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <lkcl(a)lkcl.net> 2011-12-16 14:16:01 CST ---
dan, it's more than that: you're forgetting that NamedPipes are fundamental
and critical to wine at a low-level.  i've mentioned several times now that
the implementation of ncalrpc [incorrectly] uses NamedPipes when it should
be using an implementation of local-communication [that *can* be kernel-based
or wine's equivalent thereof].

even just doing service start, stop and other management; registry edits
and reads, *everything* that's fundamental to nt is based around MSRPC,
and that means that everything that's fundamental is critically dependent
[accidentally] on NamedPipes.

you will cause *massive* resource starvation.  do a profile (gprof) on a
range of applications (or use debug grepping, whatever) looking for
WriteFile and ReadFile and Transact2 on NamedPipes.  i think you'll find
that even running "ordinary" applications has a severe performance penalty
as well as massive resource usage.

i wrote this patch as a demo, and proved that yes it can be done but it is
*not* suitable for production usage.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

Adam Martinson <adam.r.martinson(a)gmail.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |adam.r.martinson(a)gmail.com

--- Comment #43 from Adam Martinson <adam.r.martinson(a)gmail.com> 2011-12-17 17:41:11 CST ---
(In reply to comment #38)
Don't take what Dmitry says so personally, it may sound like he's trolling but
that's not his intention.  I'm tempted to agree with you on multithreading, but
if that is indeed something that needs to be done Alexandre probably either has
to do it himself, or at least be heavily involved in the process.

As I understand it this bug has 2 parts:
1 - FILE_PIPE_MESSAGE_MODE/PIPE_READMODE_MESSAGE:
Reads from the pipe get at most 1 message.  If the provided buffer is
insufficient the remainder of the message is left in the pipe and
STATUS_MORE_ENTRIES/ERROR_MORE_DATA results.  Using SOCK_SEQPACKET instead of
SOCK_STREAM isn't an option, because reads on a SOCK_SEQPACKET socket cause any
message remainder to be discarded in the case of an insufficient buffer.

The solutions I've considered for this are either implementing datagrams on top
of SOCK_STREAM sockets, as in my patch, or creating a pair of SOCK_SEQPACKET
sockets for writing and a pair of SOCK_STREAM sockets for reading, with a
server thread that waits for a message on the SOCK_SEQPACKET socket to be
available and the SOCK_STREAM socket to be empty, and then relays a single
message.  The latter is much more of a headache to implement which is why I
went with the first option.

2 - FILE_PIPE_COMPLETE_OPERATION/PIPE_NOWAIT:
Can you elaborate more on this part as far as current behavior vs correct
behavior?  I haven't started tackling this part.  I'm not convinced that
correct behavior here is incompatible with my patch, but I need to understand
the problem better.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

Adam Martinson <adam.r.martinson(a)gmail.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Attachment #37977|0                           |1
        is obsolete|                            |

--- Comment #44 from Adam Martinson <adam.r.martinson(a)gmail.com> 2011-12-19 03:59:25 CST ---
Created attachment 38025
  --> http://bugs.winehq.org/attachment.cgi?id=38025
patch 1/2 (work in progress)

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #45 from Adam Martinson <adam.r.martinson(a)gmail.com> 2011-12-19 04:02:00 CST ---
Created attachment 38026
  --> http://bugs.winehq.org/attachment.cgi?id=38026
patch 2/2 (work in progress)

This *should* make FILE_PIPE_COMPLETE_OPERATION/PIPE_NOWAIT work, for
NtReadFile() anyhow... Luke, is that what you mean by blocking semantics?

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #46 from Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <lkcl(a)lkcl.net> 2011-12-19 07:11:26 CST ---
sorry adam it's been a while, but if that's a value of 0x3 then yes it's
quite likely to be the case.

the order in which the work really needs to be done is:

* create ncalrpc which is identical functionality to existing *broken*
NamedPipes
* prove that test cases work by using broken and completely unacceptable method
  of use of socket pairs, use of which would otherwise result in wine being
  classed as a security violation [resource starvation]
* decide what to do from here:

path 1)

* decide that it's perfectly acceptable to create complete, total, utter
  reimplementations of all services when the time comes to tackle these
  things - all services which *could* be "farmed out" into userspace are
  instead forcibly implemented as wine-equivalent to kernelspace i.e.
  asynchronous.  this will be hundreds of thousands of lines of code.

path 2)

* add kernel-level multithreading to wineserver.  it involves insertion of
  global locks around data structures that have, until now, not been
  necessary.  basically the entire wineserver codebase needs to be properly
  made multithreaded.

* then write that proper "shim" which allows redirection of kernelspace
  pipe data out to userspace, allowing individual kernel-level threads to
  "block" until the *userspace* program feeds back the response.

i don't want to discourage you from working on this adam but this really is
a "bite the bullet and get on with it" point for the wine team.

of course, i am not a wine team member, nor have i yet received the offers
of payment which would allow me to help do the required work, so i have to
leave it to the wine team members to decide whether it is more useful to them
to continue with the situation as-is or whether it is more useful for them
to evaluate and take the advice above.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #47 from Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <lkcl(a)lkcl.net> 2011-12-19 07:14:54 CST ---
bottom line, adam, i apologise but until wine has proper multithreading
there's no... well i won't call it incentive... how can i put this...
if i help you as things stand, it is just to create "yet another test system
which cannot, ever, be deployed live".  there already exists such a system,
it's the patches that i originally created.

you can run the tests... actually it's best to do the ncalrpc work first...
because if you make *one* tiny error then it affects even the _startup_ code
of wine (svcctl).

that would be the most useful thing for you to do right now - implement
an ncalrpc that is independent of NamedPipes.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #48 from Alexandre Julliard <julliard(a)winehq.org> 2011-12-19 07:43:22 CST ---
There's no reason to make the server multithreaded. All blocking calls can be
implemented with a non-blocking state machine, including calls to userspace,
that BTW the server already supports. Please stop giving misguided
implementation advice about things you clearly don't understand.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #49 from Adam Martinson <adam.r.martinson(a)gmail.com> 2011-12-19 12:05:01 CST ---
Luke, I'm not sure we need a separate ncalrpc implementation, my patches do
actually work fine with svcctl.  Would be up to Alexandre though.

Alexandre, do you mind weighing in on the correct approach here?

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #50 from Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <lkcl(a)lkcl.net> 2011-12-19 13:52:40 CST ---
adam: it's fine... *if* you get it right.  however if you get things wrong,
you can't even run the test suite because wine won't _start_ the test suite,
because starting up the tests (.exes) _require_ a working NamedPipes
implementation in order to be able to call all regsvc and srvsvc functions.

come on, adam, i've pointed this out 3 times now.  i apologise for not saying
it clearly enough.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #51 from Adam Martinson <adam.r.martinson(a)gmail.com> 2011-12-19 13:59:43 CST ---
(In reply to comment #50)
Yeah I realize that wine won't start if this is botched, but I consider that a
plus: there's a built-in test case xD

FYI Alexandre says the datagram-on-SOCK_STREAM approach won't work reliably
with multiple threads sharing the same pipe, so I guess I'll have a go at the
SOCK_SEQPACKET<->SOCK_STREAM approach.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #52 from Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <lkcl(a)lkcl.net> 2011-12-19 14:05:56 CST ---
> There's no reason to make the server multithreaded. All blocking calls can be
> implemented with a non-blocking state machine, including calls to userspace,
> that BTW the server already supports.

i'm aware that it's a non-blocking state machine, alexandre.  that's
absolutely
 required, and it is good that it is a non-blocking state machine, alexandre.


 however, unfortunately, in order to get a proper implementation of NamedPipes,
 it is necessary to use blocking calls on sockets.

 that is simply and unavoidable a fact.  there's no point in trying to deny
this
 fact.  it is simply a fact.

 the only POSIX system call that can be used - period - is a blocking call
 on a socket.

 fact.

 now.

 how, exactly, when there is only one thread / process in wineserver, which,
 if it is blocked because it is waiting for a response from a socket,
 will it be possible to service any other operations?

 answer: more threads are needed... *in wineserver*.

 so, please can i ask you the following:

 1) you stop implying that i am a fucking moron.  it'll get us nowhere, fast.

 2) that you evaluate whether there are *any* other options - i don't believe
    that there are - any other POSIX functions and/or tricks available.

 please feel free to entirely ignore both these requests.  i don't have to
 put up with being told that i don't know what i'm talking about, and you
 should know by now not to do that.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #53 from Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <lkcl(a)lkcl.net> 2011-12-19 14:15:04 CST ---
(In reply to comment #51)
> (In reply to comment #50)
> Yeah I realize that wine won't start if this is botched, but I consider that a
> plus: there's a built-in test case xD

yes... but it's not a particularly good one!  the diagnostics report is
 "Wine didn't work".  or "Wine hung at startup".

 what i'm saying is: if it's acceptable to have a completely inexplicable
 termination of wine's operation, then sure, that's "acceptable".

 personally i would find that very very strange, to be working on a software
 (libre) project where it was acceptable to do this.
> FYI Alexandre says the datagram-on-SOCK_STREAM approach won't work reliably
> with multiple threads sharing the same pipe,

preeciselyyyyyy.

 well done.

 now you know why i created one socket-pair *per message*.  it's to avoid
 *exactly* that case where multiple threads try to read (or write) to a
 unix-pipe [as the underlying implementation]

 ... and that will result in resource-starvation.

 keep going, ok?  you'll get there.  if you manage to make this work
 in the (critical) multi-threaded case, i'll be falling off my chair in
 shock.

 what _would_ solve this would be if POSIX had a NamedPipe implementation.
 no, seriously!  if the linux kernel had NamedPipe semantics, i.e.
 reliable SOCK_STREAM with datagram (fixed packet size) semantics *as well*,
 everything would be ok.

 ... but.... actually... it wouldn't be ok, because then the FreeBSD team
 would try to install Wine, and would find that it didn't work.

 basically you're stuck with what's available in "old" style POSIX semantics.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #54 from Alexandre Julliard <julliard(a)winehq.org> 2011-12-19 15:25:28 CST ---
(In reply to comment #52)
> please feel free to entirely ignore both these requests.  i don't have to
>  put up with being told that i don't know what i'm talking about, and you
>  should know by now not to do that.

I certainly know that arguing with you is a waste of time. My only reason for
posting was to prevent others from thinking that they could get useful advice
from this bug. I'll happily go back to ignoring you now.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #55 from Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <lkcl(a)lkcl.net> 2011-12-19 16:43:52 CST ---
alexandre, feel free to do whatever you feel is most useful to you.


adam, i've just discovered this:
http://urchin.earth.li/~twic/Sequenced_Packets_Over_Ordinary_TCP.html

a quick search online shows that SOCK_SEQPACKET is, indeed, only
supported on a few "arcane" platforms, implemented on TCP on others
but not on unix domain sockets, so its use would put wine at risk
of completely failing to operate correctly... but only on certain
platforms.

that link shows however that someone came up with a realllly weird
usage for "urgent TCP pointers" which actually provides, amazingly,
the same semantics.

about the only people that *i* know who would have a clue what that's
about are some of the people i met when working at linuxcare. rusty
russell, andrew tridgell, and a couple of others.

amazing.  unix might actually have something that provides guaranteed
atomic delivery of fixed-size messages.  i've been hunting for that
functionality for 12 years :)

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

David <davilando(a)gmail.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |davilando(a)gmail.com

--- Comment #56 from David <davilando(a)gmail.com> 2011-12-21 15:21:47 CST ---
First of all, thanks a lot for your hard work on the wine source code :D

I'm not sure if I'm adding anything valuable to help solving this issue, but
I'll never know, until I try ;)

Since your are talking about named pipes, I thought the following bug reports
are related to this bug report, and might help in testing the newly developed
code/patches:

"Games with UPlay won't start due to ReadFileEx failture":
 http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=28119

"[Assassin's Creed II / Brotherhood]Online mode does not works":
http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=28453

I've so, could you please add these bus as 'related to this bug'?

'And as affected apps' I think you can add a lot of Ubisoft Games:
Assassins Creed 2
Assassins Creed Brotherhood
Assassins Creed Revelations

Thanks!

And good luck fixing named pipes in wine!

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

Juan Lang <juan.lang(a)gmail.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|juan_lang(a)yahoo.com         |

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #57 from Adam Martinson <adam.r.martinson(a)gmail.com> 2011-12-31 04:27:07 CST ---
Got the SOCK_SEQPACKET<->SOCK_STREAM version mostly working, then discovered
that named_pipe.c needs a total rewrite... Closing the server end of the pipe
without disconnecting should behave the same way as the client end:  reads on
the other end are still perfectly valid... and that's incompatible with the way
the current pipe objects are structured in the server.  From what I can tell
that's the only thing still stopping the python multithreading tests from
succeeding.  I'll post a new patch when I get that working.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #58 from Adam Martinson <adam.r.martinson(a)gmail.com> 2011-12-31 08:37:59 CST ---
(In reply to comment #57)
Hmm, maybe that's not the real issue... the python tests are giving me the same
errors even with those mods.  Could it be an implicit flush or something like
that??  I'll have to write some tests... any ideas would be helpful.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #59 from Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <lkcl(a)lkcl.net> 2011-12-31 08:52:09 CST ---
(In reply to comment #58)
> (In reply to comment #57)
> Hmm, maybe that's not the real issue... the python tests are giving me the same
> errors even with those mods.  Could it be an implicit flush or something like
> that??  I'll have to write some tests... any ideas would be helpful.

speak to the people that i advised you to speak to, and follow the links
to the solution that i advised you to follow.

SOCK_SEQPACKET is *not* portable - its use will terminate any possibility
of wine ever being useable on freebsd or anywhere other the absolute
latest and greatest versions of gnu/linux OSes.

feel free to completely ignore this and any other advice and to learn the
lesson that you feel is most useful to you.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #60 from Adam Martinson <adam.r.martinson(a)gmail.com> 2011-12-31 13:44:37 CST ---
(In reply to comment #59)
> SOCK_SEQPACKET is *not* portable - its use will terminate any possibility
> of wine ever being useable on freebsd or anywhere other the absolute
> latest and greatest versions of gnu/linux OSes.

I'm aware of this; on platforms/distros where SOCK_SEQPACKET isn't supported,
we'll have to use TCP urgent pointers or something something like that. 
However, that's a step that can come later, first I'd like to get the thing
working xD  The TCP urgent pointers look like roughly equivalent functionality
to SOCK_SEQPACKET, so for those platforms/distros we can replace those parts.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

Adam Martinson <adam.r.martinson(a)gmail.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Attachment #38025|0                           |1
        is obsolete|                            |
  Attachment #38026|0                           |1
        is obsolete|                            |

--- Comment #61 from Adam Martinson <adam.r.martinson(a)gmail.com> 2012-01-01 14:49:49 CST ---
Created attachment 38210
  --> http://bugs.winehq.org/attachment.cgi?id=38210
patch (work in progress)

OK, this one passes most of the python multithreading tests, but fails on
sending a 16M message due to the system limit for SOCK_SEQPACKET.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #62 from Adam Martinson <adam.r.martinson(a)gmail.com> 2012-01-02 14:52:03 CST ---
TCP urgent pointers aren't going to work; you only get 1 of them per socket
end.  From what I've read they're basically the TCP version of MSG_OOB.  We'll
have to figure something else out, I don't see Alexandre accepting this
implementation due to the lack of portability.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #63 from Adam Martinson <adam.r.martinson(a)gmail.com> 2012-01-04 02:53:59 CST ---
Alright, another idea, but a PITA to implement.  This should be portable and
give us the kind of low-level control we need to get correct behavior. 
Basically we implement the pipe's read/write buffers as shm segments protected
by mutei.  Then the server can just maintain the data stream internally as a
list (or pair of lists for duplex).  Huge PITA, as we'll have to make files for
each pipe instance so we have something for ftok(), but should work.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

Adam Martinson <adam.r.martinson(a)gmail.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Attachment #38210|0                           |1
        is obsolete|                            |

--- Comment #64 from Adam Martinson <adam.r.martinson(a)gmail.com> 2012-01-07 19:05:16 CST ---
Created attachment 38295
  --> http://bugs.winehq.org/attachment.cgi?id=38295
patch (work in progress)

Ok, so Alexandre says we don't want to use shm; he suggested sending the
messages through the server as part of the request/reply data, and... it works!
 It passes all of the python multiprocessing tests anyhow (tested 2.7 and 3.2).

However, there's a race condition with RTL_RWLOCKs somewhere, I'm not sure if
it's related to my changes or not.  In the python tests it manifests as an
occasional hang at

test_lock (__main__.WithManagerTestLock) ...

In general I get

err:ntdll:RtlDeleteResource Deleting active MRSW lock (0x112414), expect
failure

as the last message occasionally regardless of what wine is running, I'm
guessing the 2 are related. Any insight into that would be helpful.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #65 from Dan Kegel <dank(a)kegel.com> 2012-01-07 19:17:01 CST ---
I think I've been seeing that "Deleting active MRSW lock" error myself,
so it might not be your changes.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #66 from Luca Bennati <lucak3(a)gmail.com> 2012-01-08 08:33:16 CST ---
(In reply to comment #64)
> In general I get
> err:ntdll:RtlDeleteResource Deleting active MRSW lock (0x112414), expect
> failure

As comment 65 by Dan Kegel says, not related to your changes, it already
happens on vanilla Wine.
It may just be that the python tests make Wine reach that code more often.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

Adam Martinson <adam.r.martinson(a)gmail.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Attachment #38295|0                           |1
        is obsolete|                            |

--- Comment #67 from Adam Martinson <adam.r.martinson(a)gmail.com> 2012-01-11 21:15:26 CST ---
Created attachment 38329
  --> http://bugs.winehq.org/attachment.cgi?id=38329
patch 1/4

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #68 from Adam Martinson <adam.r.martinson(a)gmail.com> 2012-01-11 21:15:52 CST ---
Created attachment 38330
  --> http://bugs.winehq.org/attachment.cgi?id=38330
patch 2/4

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #69 from Adam Martinson <adam.r.martinson(a)gmail.com> 2012-01-11 21:16:18 CST ---
Created attachment 38331
  --> http://bugs.winehq.org/attachment.cgi?id=38331
patch 3/4

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #70 from Adam Martinson <adam.r.martinson(a)gmail.com> 2012-01-11 21:17:59 CST ---
Created attachment 38332
  --> http://bugs.winehq.org/attachment.cgi?id=38332
patch 4/4

I could use some extra sets of eyes on these; any feedback would be helpful.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

Dan <grinnz(a)gmail.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |grinnz(a)gmail.com

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #71 from Jerome Leclanche <adys.wh(a)gmail.com> 2012-02-11 09:58:09 CST ---
(In reply to comment #70)
Adam, are you still interested in working on those patches after the 1.4
release?

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #72 from Adam Martinson <adam.r.martinson(a)gmail.com> 2012-02-11 12:10:26 CST ---
(In reply to comment #71)
> (In reply to comment #70)
> Adam, are you still interested in working on those patches after the 1.4
> release?

Yes; Alexandre said I should wait to submit them until then.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

Luke Bratch <l_bratch(a)yahoo.co.uk> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |l_bratch(a)yahoo.co.uk

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

surfing86 <surfing86(a)live.it> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |surfing86(a)live.it

--- Comment #73 from surfing86 <surfing86(a)live.it> 2012-03-08 05:56:58 CST ---
1.4 version has been released
I'm waiting for your updated patch, need it to start Anno 2070.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

Adam Martinson <adam.r.martinson(a)gmail.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Attachment #38329|0                           |1
        is obsolete|                            |

--- Comment #74 from Adam Martinson <adam.r.martinson(a)gmail.com> 2012-03-08 17:48:24 CST ---
Created attachment 39250
  --> http://bugs.winehq.org/attachment.cgi?id=39250
patch 1/4

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

Adam Martinson <adam.r.martinson(a)gmail.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Attachment #38330|0                           |1
        is obsolete|                            |

--- Comment #75 from Adam Martinson <adam.r.martinson(a)gmail.com> 2012-03-08 17:48:46 CST ---
Created attachment 39251
  --> http://bugs.winehq.org/attachment.cgi?id=39251
patch 2/4

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

Adam Martinson <adam.r.martinson(a)gmail.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Attachment #38331|0                           |1
        is obsolete|                            |

--- Comment #76 from Adam Martinson <adam.r.martinson(a)gmail.com> 2012-03-08 17:49:07 CST ---
Created attachment 39252
  --> http://bugs.winehq.org/attachment.cgi?id=39252
patch 3/4

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

Adam Martinson <adam.r.martinson(a)gmail.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Attachment #38332|0                           |1
        is obsolete|                            |

--- Comment #77 from Adam Martinson <adam.r.martinson(a)gmail.com> 2012-03-08 17:49:38 CST ---
Created attachment 39253
  --> http://bugs.winehq.org/attachment.cgi?id=39253
patch 4/4

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #78 from Adam Martinson <adam.r.martinson(a)gmail.com> 2012-03-08 17:52:35 CST ---
(In reply to comment #73)
> 1.4 version has been released
> I'm waiting for your updated patch, need it to start Anno 2070.

I submitted them to winehq today.  Getting them into wine may be a bit of a
process, as they are big and affect sensitive areas, but you can use the
updated ones here in the meantime.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

Ernst <ernst(a)planetcoms.co.za> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |ernst(a)planetcoms.co.za

--- Comment #79 from Ernst <ernst(a)planetcoms.co.za> 2012-03-23 03:11:26 CDT ---
Was hoping this would be implemented by now.

Sadly I cant seem to apply these patches to 1.4.

Any news from Wine Team regarding this?

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

Alexey Loukianov <mooroon2(a)mail.ru> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |mooroon2(a)mail.ru

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

Saulius K. <saulius2(a)gmail.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |saulius2(a)gmail.com

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

Daniel Jelinski <djelinski1(a)gmail.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |djelinski1(a)gmail.com

--- Comment #80 from Daniel Jelinski <djelinski1(a)gmail.com> 2012-12-16 08:54:21 CST ---
(In reply to comment #78)
> I submitted them to winehq today.  Getting them into wine may be a bit of a
> process, as they are big and affect sensitive areas, but you can use the
> updated ones here in the meantime.

Adam,
are you still interested in getting these patches into Wine?

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #81 from Adam Martinson <adam.r.martinson(a)gmail.com> 2012-12-16 13:17:25 CST ---
(In reply to comment #80)
> (In reply to comment #78)
> > I submitted them to winehq today.  Getting them into wine may be a bit of a
> > process, as they are big and affect sensitive areas, but you can use the
> > updated ones here in the meantime.
>
> Adam,
> are you still interested in getting these patches into Wine?

When I submitted them they were ignored, so unless Alexandre expresses an
interest in getting them in I don't see it happening.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #82 from Daniel Jelinski <djelinski1(a)gmail.com> 2012-12-17 02:14:05 CST ---
(In reply to comment #81)
> When I submitted them they were ignored, so unless Alexandre expresses an
> interest in getting them in I don't see it happening.

Patch sequences are usually reviewed in order, and your first patch is way too
large for reviewing. This is probably why the others were ignored.
Patch 3 is is just about the right size. You are removing a comment in
SetNamedPipeHandleState and adding a FIXME. You should probably add a note in
your patch stating that you verified that the comment is no longer applicable.
Tests from patch 2 should probably be moved into a separate patch. Other than
that it looks good to me.
Patch 4 also needs splitting. Keep in mind that usually the patches are
reviewed, not the resulting code. As long as the code changes are obviously
related to patch title, they should be okay.

Other than that, I was able to connect to MS SQL Server using named pipes
protocol with these patches applied, so they are probably doing the right
thing. I'd love to see them accepted. Will you split them?

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #83 from Adam Martinson <adam.r.martinson(a)gmail.com> 2012-12-17 10:03:10 CST ---
(In reply to comment #82)
> Other than that, I was able to connect to MS SQL Server using named pipes
> protocol with these patches applied, so they are probably doing the right
> thing. I'd love to see them accepted. Will you split them?

It's easy enough to split the tests off into separate patches, but I could use
some advice on how to split them up otherwise without breaking the "do
something useful" and "don't break stuff" rules...  Any ideas?

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #84 from Daniel Jelinski <djelinski1(a)gmail.com> 2012-12-17 14:27:52 CST ---
For starters, you are renaming several structs, constants and variables. This
takes a lot of space in the patch, obfuscating the changes you care for. You
should split the renames to a separate no-op patch, if you really need them.
Patches that do not change behavior are easier to verify. Other than that, use
git diff and try to make the result as small as possible for the patches that
actually change something. Hopefully this will be enough to make the series
verifiable.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #85 from Adam Martinson <adam.r.martinson(a)gmail.com> 2012-12-17 14:38:18 CST ---
(In reply to comment #84)
> For starters, you are renaming several structs, constants and variables. This
> takes a lot of space in the patch, obfuscating the changes you care for. You
> should split the renames to a separate no-op patch, if you really need them.

They're not essential, they just make it more clear how the pipe actually
behaves.  I'll give that a try though, thanks.

Any obvious issues with the ones from bug 17273 (SetNamedPipeHandleState)?

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #86 from Daniel Jelinski <djelinski1(a)gmail.com> 2012-12-18 01:24:24 CST ---
(In reply to comment #85)
> Any obvious issues with the ones from bug 17273 (SetNamedPipeHandleState)?

The older version of patches 2 and 3 here? The new version looks better to me.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #87 from Adam Martinson <adam.r.martinson(a)gmail.com> 2012-12-18 12:53:57 CST ---
(In reply to comment #86)
> (In reply to comment #85)
> > Any obvious issues with the ones from bug 17273 (SetNamedPipeHandleState)?
>
> The older version of patches 2 and 3 here? The new version looks better to me.

LOL, I guess they are (it's been a while since I looked at these) xD

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #88 from Adam Martinson <adam.r.martinson(a)gmail.com> 2012-12-18 19:52:08 CST ---
Think I've got the first 3 split apart pretty well, any ideas on splitting the
last one?  I don't know how I would without breaking stuff in between...

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #89 from Daniel Jelinski <djelinski1(a)gmail.com> 2012-12-19 02:58:36 CST ---
(In reply to comment #88)
> Think I've got the first 3 split apart pretty well, any ideas on splitting the
> last one?  I don't know how I would without breaking stuff in between...

Yes, it seems that you can't split this one. You can improve its readability in
a different way:
- in several places you are checking if the pipe is in message write mode. This
check takes a lot of space, so you should probably put it into a function.
- could you merge named_pipe_peek_msg with named_pipe_recv_msg? Or at least
move common code to a function. This way if something breaks, you will have
only one place to fix.

Also, this looks suspicious:
+            while (!(end->flags & NAMED_PIPE_MESSAGE_STREAM_READ) &&
+                   !list_empty( &end->msgs ) &&
+                   reply->result < req->length);

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #90 from Adam Martinson <adam.r.martinson(a)gmail.com> 2012-12-19 11:18:35 CST ---
(In reply to comment #89)
> - could you merge named_pipe_peek_msg with named_pipe_recv_msg? Or at least
> move common code to a function. This way if something breaks, you will have
> only one place to fix.
> I looked into that, doesn't seem reasonable as the behavior is rather
> different.
> Also, this looks suspicious:
> +            while (!(end->flags & NAMED_PIPE_MESSAGE_STREAM_READ) &&
> +                   !list_empty( &end->msgs ) &&
> +                   reply->result < req->length);
> It's the correct behavior, if you're reading a byte stream you might keep
> going, but if you're reading a message you don't.

I'll upload my updated patches shortly, lemme know what you think.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

Adam Martinson <adam.r.martinson(a)gmail.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Attachment #39250|0                           |1
        is obsolete|                            |
  Attachment #39251|0                           |1
        is obsolete|                            |
  Attachment #39252|0                           |1
        is obsolete|                            |
  Attachment #39253|0                           |1
        is obsolete|                            |

--- Comment #91 from Adam Martinson <adam.r.martinson(a)gmail.com> 2012-12-19 11:21:13 CST ---
Created attachment 42851
  --> http://bugs.winehq.org/attachment.cgi?id=42851
[PATCH 1/7] server/named_pipe: (no-op) Renames to make actual behavior clearer.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #92 from Adam Martinson <adam.r.martinson(a)gmail.com> 2012-12-19 11:21:57 CST ---
Created attachment 42852
  --> http://bugs.winehq.org/attachment.cgi?id=42852
[PATCH 2/7] server: Either end of a named pipe is readable after the other has
been closed.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #93 from Adam Martinson <adam.r.martinson(a)gmail.com> 2012-12-19 11:22:31 CST ---
Created attachment 42853
  --> http://bugs.winehq.org/attachment.cgi?id=42853
[PATCH 3/7] kernel32: Tests for closing named pipes.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #94 from Adam Martinson <adam.r.martinson(a)gmail.com> 2012-12-19 11:22:55 CST ---
Created attachment 42854
  --> http://bugs.winehq.org/attachment.cgi?id=42854
[PATCH 4/7] ntdll: Add support for FILE_PIPE_INFORMATION.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #95 from Adam Martinson <adam.r.martinson(a)gmail.com> 2012-12-19 11:23:38 CST ---
Created attachment 42855
  --> http://bugs.winehq.org/attachment.cgi?id=42855
[PATCH 5/7] ntdll: Tests for FILE_PIPE_INFORMATION.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #96 from Adam Martinson <adam.r.martinson(a)gmail.com> 2012-12-19 11:24:39 CST ---
Created attachment 42856
  --> http://bugs.winehq.org/attachment.cgi?id=42856
[PATCH 6/7] kernel32: Add support for {Get|Set}NamedPipeHandleState().

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #97 from Adam Martinson <adam.r.martinson(a)gmail.com> 2012-12-19 11:25:22 CST ---
Created attachment 42857
  --> http://bugs.winehq.org/attachment.cgi?id=42857
[PATCH 7/7] server: Add support for named pipe message mode.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

Adam Martinson <adam.r.martinson(a)gmail.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Attachment #42854|0                           |1
           is patch|                            |
  Attachment #42854|application/octet-stream    |text/plain
          mime type|                            |

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #98 from Daniel Jelinski <djelinski1(a)gmail.com> 2012-12-19 15:31:53 CST ---
(In reply to comment #90)
> It's the correct behavior, if you're reading a byte stream you might keep
> going, but if you're reading a message you don't.

Sorry, I misread the code. My mistake.
> I'll upload my updated patches shortly, lemme know what you think.

- Drop the whitespace changes from patches 2, 3 and 6
- get rid of warnings - I got one:
file.c: In function ‘FILE_AsyncReadService’:
file.c:383:12: warning: variable ‘hAvail’ set but not used
[-Wunused-but-set-variable]
- and send to wine-patches :)
Hopefully this time you'll get better response.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #99 from Adam Martinson <adam.r.martinson(a)gmail.com> 2012-12-19 16:48:15 CST ---
(In reply to comment #98)
> - Drop the whitespace changes from patches 2, 3 and 6
> - get rid of warnings - I got one:
> file.c: In function ‘FILE_AsyncReadService’:
> file.c:383:12: warning: variable ‘hAvail’ set but not used
> [-Wunused-but-set-variable]
> - and send to wine-patches :)
> Hopefully this time you'll get better response.

Sent, wish me luck, and thanks for the help =)

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

anatoly techtonik <techtonik(a)gmail.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |techtonik(a)gmail.com

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

Anastasius Focht <focht(a)gmx.net> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |focht(a)gmx.net

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

euug3576+winebugs(a)gmail.com changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |euug3576+winebugs(a)gmail.com

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #100 from Adam Martinson <adam.r.martinson(a)gmail.com> 2012-12-20 14:01:01 CST ---
Well, they got looked at this time =)  The 2nd patch still needs splitting
though, any ideas?

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #101 from Adam Martinson <adam.r.martinson(a)gmail.com> 2012-12-20 14:32:53 CST ---
(In reply to comment #100)
> Well, they got looked at this time =)  The 2nd patch still needs splitting
> though, any ideas?

I split the ntdll + kernel32 parts off, I guess they're more to do with
zero-length pipe reads than anything else.  Think that will be enough?

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

Adam Martinson <adam.r.martinson(a)gmail.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Attachment #42851|0                           |1
        is obsolete|                            |
  Attachment #42852|0                           |1
        is obsolete|                            |
  Attachment #42853|0                           |1
        is obsolete|                            |
  Attachment #42854|0                           |1
        is obsolete|                            |
  Attachment #42855|0                           |1
        is obsolete|                            |
  Attachment #42856|0                           |1
        is obsolete|                            |
  Attachment #42857|0                           |1
        is obsolete|                            |

--- Comment #102 from Adam Martinson <adam.r.martinson(a)gmail.com> 2012-12-20 14:46:57 CST ---
Created attachment 42872
  --> http://bugs.winehq.org/attachment.cgi?id=42872
Patches (8)

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #103 from Daniel Jelinski <djelinski1(a)gmail.com> 2012-12-20 14:50:51 CST ---
It's still not quite clear what exactly that patch changes. Am I right that the
main part is adding pipe_end_flush and pipe_end_ioctl, and making both pipe
ends use the same set of fd_ops? If so, you could split the cosmetic changes
(i.e. everything else) into a separate patch after that one. Yes, that probably
means you will need to add some code in one patch only to delete it in the next
one, but that should improve readability considerably.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

Adam Martinson <adam.r.martinson(a)gmail.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Attachment #42872|1                           |0
           is patch|                            |
  Attachment #42872|text/plain                  |application/octet-stream
          mime type|                            |

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

Adam Martinson <adam.r.martinson(a)gmail.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Attachment #42872|application/octet-stream    |application/x-gzip
          mime type|                            |

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #104 from Adam Martinson <adam.r.martinson(a)gmail.com> 2012-12-20 16:10:55 CST ---
(In reply to comment #103)
> It's still not quite clear what exactly that patch changes. Am I right that the
> main part is adding pipe_end_flush and pipe_end_ioctl, and making both pipe
> ends use the same set of fd_ops? If so, you could split the cosmetic changes
> (i.e. everything else) into a separate patch after that one. Yes, that probably
> means you will need to add some code in one patch only to delete it in the next
> one, but that should improve readability considerably.

Sort of.  Basically both ends of the pipe behave more or less the same, so it
moves the stuff that's shared into the pipe_server object and the stuff that's
specific to each end into the pipe_end object.  Perhaps I should rename
pipe_server to pipe_instance in the 1st patch?  I could also and an enum for
which end is which (enum { pe_server, pe_client };).

The major change becomes using the pipe_end object for both the client and
server ends, and I don't think there's any way to do that without changing it
everywhere at once.  The addition of pipe_end_ioctl() really just takes over
FSCTL_PIPE_DISCONNECT from pipe_server_ioctl(), because pipe_server_ioctl will
only be called if the pipe isn't connected.  pipe_end_flush() is really just a
rename of pipe_server_flush(), and becomes usable from either end.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #105 from Daniel Jelinski <djelinski1(a)gmail.com> 2012-12-21 02:58:03 CST ---
(In reply to comment #104)
> (..) Perhaps I should rename pipe_server to pipe_instance in the 1st patch?

Yes, I think that's a good idea.
> I could also and an enum for
> which end is which (enum { pe_server, pe_client };).

Or use:
struct pipe_end     *server, *client;
instead of:
struct pipe_end     *ends[2];
That could also help.
> The major change becomes using the pipe_end object for both the client and
> server ends, and I don't think there's any way to do that without changing it
> everywhere at once.

Well, the patch title says that the main change is making both pipe ends
readable. Is there any feasible way to separate making both ends readable from
making both ends use pipe_end? If there is, you should probably do it. If not
(and it seems this way), you should probably change the patch title to reflect
the major change, and add a comment that the side effect is making both ends
readable.
Also I noticed that you changed the order of create_pipe_server and
create_pipe_end. If you restore the original order, you'll get a smaller diff
:)
There's not much more you can do here, so that must suffice.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

Adam Martinson <adam.r.martinson(a)gmail.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Attachment #42872|0                           |1
        is obsolete|                            |

--- Comment #106 from Adam Martinson <adam.r.martinson(a)gmail.com> 2012-12-21 09:43:54 CST ---
Created attachment 42882
  --> http://bugs.winehq.org/attachment.cgi?id=42882
Patches (9)

Using an array for the ends makes the relay logic easier in the later patches,
so I think I'll stick with that.  How do these look?

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #107 from Adam Martinson <adam.r.martinson(a)gmail.com> 2012-12-21 10:15:59 CST ---
(In reply to comment #105)
> Also I noticed that you changed the order of create_pipe_server and
> create_pipe_end. If you restore the original order, you'll get a smaller diff
> :)

I need to call create_pipe_end() in create_pipe_instance(), so I would have to
forward-declare it otherwise.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #108 from Daniel Jelinski <djelinski1(a)gmail.com> 2012-12-22 01:57:45 CST ---
These look good to me. Get your defense speech ready and send them in :)

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #109 from Adam Martinson <adam.r.martinson(a)gmail.com> 2012-12-28 15:13:22 CST ---
(In reply to comment #108)
> These look good to me. Get your defense speech ready and send them in :)

Well, I tried; looks like they're back to being ignored.  If you can get
Alexandre to tell you what's wrong I'm happy to fix it, but without knowing
what the problem is I don't think there's anything more to be done.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #110 from Daniel Jelinski <djelinski1(a)gmail.com> 2012-12-29 02:32:40 CST ---
Alexandre finally sent a comment:
http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-devel/2012-December/098271.html
I think you may have to break some things in order to split patch 3. From my
experience, it may be acceptable to break something in a patch to fix it in a
later one, as long as 1) you describe what exactly is broken and which patch
fixes it, and 2) you don't break make test. I never had to add todo_wine, so I
don't know if that would pass.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

Adam Martinson <adam.r.martinson(a)gmail.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Attachment #42882|0                           |1
        is obsolete|                            |

--- Comment #111 from Adam Martinson <adam.r.martinson(a)gmail.com> 2012-12-29 13:21:13 CST ---
Created attachment 43008
  --> http://bugs.winehq.org/attachment.cgi?id=43008
Patches (9)

I've got patch 3 cut down a little more, think that's enough?

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #112 from Daniel Jelinski <djelinski1(a)gmail.com> 2012-12-29 14:51:47 CST ---
I like it better, but I don't think it will be enough. I think you have to
remove/comment out all fd_ops you need to change, and then re-add them one at a
time.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #113 from Adam Martinson <adam.r.martinson(a)gmail.com> 2012-12-29 23:33:56 CST ---
(In reply to comment #112)
> I like it better, but I don't think it will be enough. I think you have to
> remove/comment out all fd_ops you need to change, and then re-add them one at a
> time.

But I can't actually break stuff here, because if I do wine will not boot
properly and so it can't run the tests anyhow.  How do I split it without
breaking stuff?

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #114 from Daniel Jelinski <djelinski1(a)gmail.com> 2012-12-30 03:38:27 CST ---
(In reply to comment #113)
> How do I split it without breaking stuff?

I have no idea. You should ask it on wine-devel, going through your available
options:
- splitting to smaller patches that break stuff, hoping that AJ will re-merge
before applying instead of just rejecting them
- dropping that patch from your series
- making CloseHandle work correctly in one patch, then splitting used
structures
- waiting for someone to come up with a better idea, which you have already
been doing for over a year.

If I remember correctly, options 2 and 3 would result in even bigger
unsplittable patches, so the first one looks best to me, but ask AJ first.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #115 from euug3576+winebugs(a)gmail.com 2012-12-30 04:20:13 CST ---
Whilst I don't have the expertise to help you guys technically, I'd like to say
thanks on behalf of wine users for your time & persistence!!

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

Adam Martinson <adam.r.martinson(a)gmail.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Attachment #43008|0                           |1
        is obsolete|                            |

--- Comment #116 from Adam Martinson <adam.r.martinson(a)gmail.com> 2012-12-30 15:45:30 CST ---
Created attachment 43034
  --> http://bugs.winehq.org/attachment.cgi?id=43034
Patches (9)

Re-uploading these, think I zipped them up wrong.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

Adam Martinson <adam.r.martinson(a)gmail.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Attachment #43034|0                           |1
        is obsolete|                            |

--- Comment #117 from Adam Martinson <adam.r.martinson(a)gmail.com> 2012-12-31 14:56:27 CST ---
Created attachment 43046
  --> http://bugs.winehq.org/attachment.cgi?id=43046
Patches (12)

Got that one down to 20k by moving some trivial stuff to separate patches. 
Worth resubmitting yet or no?

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

Adam Martinson <adam.r.martinson(a)gmail.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Attachment #43046|0                           |1
        is obsolete|                            |

--- Comment #118 from Adam Martinson <adam.r.martinson(a)gmail.com> 2013-01-02 19:09:12 CST ---
Created attachment 43063
  --> http://bugs.winehq.org/attachment.cgi?id=43063
Patches (10)

Dan, I tried your splitting idea, and it looks pretty good to me.  Any
thoughts?

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #119 from Daniel Jelinski <djelinski1(a)gmail.com> 2013-01-03 01:52:54 CST ---
You can (and should) split it some more. Changing flush deserves its separate
patch, and so does changing ioctl.
Also this series is getting quite long. You could stop resending the later
patches to wine-patches until at least some get accepted.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #120 from Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <lkcl(a)lkcl.net> 2013-01-03 04:00:28 CST ---
there's a way round the "requirement" that tests be run, which is to add
unnecessary code that checks - at runtime - whether the old functionality is to
be used or the new functionality is to be used, and to have the choice be made
either as a compile-time switch or even as a configuration option.

in this way, the code gets massively complicated and it would be a hell of a
lot of extra work for adam, as well as for all reviewers concerned, but the
"piecemeal" patch could be applied, because each patch could be applied
individually, knowing that it is going to have zero effect.

another alternative to that is to actually patch in replacement functions with
alternative names, where the replacement functions are not called (at all)
until the last and final patch.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #121 from Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <lkcl(a)lkcl.net> 2013-01-03 04:01:06 CST ---
btw adam did you also check that this patch works on FreeBSD?

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #122 from Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <lkcl(a)lkcl.net> 2013-01-03 04:09:32 CST ---
i'm going to suggest that this and other renames be made as separate patches. 
it's very unclear that there's anything significant to review here, because the
only thing that's happening is pipe_server and pipe_instance are being renamed,
and server to end.

oh wait!  event is also being renamed to event_empty which is highly
significant, and buried within the renaming.


-static void notify_empty( struct pipe_server *server )
+static void notify_empty( struct pipe_instance *end )
 {
-    if (!server->flush_poll)
+    if (!end->flush_poll)
         return;
-    assert( server->state == ps_connected );
-    assert( server->event );
-    remove_timeout_user( server->flush_poll );
-    server->flush_poll = NULL;
-    set_event( server->event );
-    release_object( server->event );
-    server->event = NULL;
+    assert( end->state == ps_connected );
+    assert( end->event_empty );
+    remove_timeout_user( end->flush_poll );
+    end->flush_poll = NULL;
+    set_event( end->event_empty );
+    release_object( end->event_empty );
+    end->event_empty = NULL;
 }

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #123 from Adam Martinson <adam.r.martinson(a)gmail.com> 2013-01-03 10:00:18 CST ---
(In reply to comment #119)
> You can (and should) split it some more. Changing flush deserves its separate
> patch, and so does changing ioctl.

You mean split patch 5 more?

(In reply to comment #120)
> there's a way round the "requirement" that tests be run, which is to add
> unnecessary code that checks - at runtime - whether the old functionality is to
> be used or the new functionality is to be used, and to have the choice be made
> either as a compile-time switch or even as a configuration option.

I don't think Alexandre would go for that without some compelling reason.

(In reply to comment #121)
> btw adam did you also check that this patch works on FreeBSD?

No, but there's no reason it shouldn't.  I'm not using any system calls, etc
that Wine doesn't already use.

(In reply to comment #122)
> oh wait!  event is also being renamed to event_empty which is highly
> significant, and buried within the renaming.

Why is that significant?  Empty events are the only thing it's used for.  In a
later patch an event_avail gets added, I just renamed it to avoid confusion. 
The structs in here are just for the server, the renames don't affect anything
outside of that file.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #124 from Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <lkcl(a)lkcl.net> 2013-01-03 12:48:16 CST ---
> (In reply to comment #120)
> > there's a way round the "requirement" that tests be run, which is to add
> > unnecessary code that checks - at runtime - whether the old functionality is to
> > be used or the new functionality is to be used, and to have the choice be made
> > either as a compile-time switch or even as a configuration option.
>
> I don't think Alexandre would go for that without some compelling reason.

well, alexandre already asked for tests to be carried out, and you've already
 explained that tests cannot be carried out unless the *entire* patch set is
 applied and accepted, because it's so fundamental.

 the two things are therefore mutually exclusively incompatible, therefore
 a third way is essential to devise.  and accept that it is necessary to
 devise.

 a runtime switch or a compile time switch is such a third way.

 if that third way also turns out to be unacceptable then, round the loop
 we go: one of the other two choices must be chosen... or a fourth way found.
> (In reply to comment #121)
> > btw adam did you also check that this patch works on FreeBSD?
>
> No, but there's no reason it shouldn't.  I'm not using any system calls, etc
> that Wine doesn't already use.

ok great!  last time you mentioned using some weird feature of TCP
 that was only available to linux.
> (In reply to comment #122)
> > oh wait!  event is also being renamed to event_empty which is highly
> > significant, and buried within the renaming.
>
> Why is that significant?  Empty events are the only thing it's used for.  In a
> later patch an event_avail gets added, I just renamed it to avoid confusion. 
> The structs in here are just for the server, the renames don't affect anything
> outside of that file.

it's not obvious just from the patch what's going on.  is it *only* renaming? 
if so, what gets renamed to what?  if you only renamed one at a time, the
number of lines being changed would be smaller, so comparisons would be easy.

 the sheer number of things being renamed here actually removes *entire*
functions and replaces them with ones that are... identical?  are they?  i
don't know, and i can't tell.

 later on in the patch, the renaming becomes sufficiently severe that it looks
like you're removing create_pipe_server.  whereas what it looks like is that
you've swapped the function order of find_available_[server/instance] and
create_pipe_[server/instance].  i don't know, because it's hard to tell.

 my recommendation would be - pain in the ass as it is - to do this as
completely separate renames.  and for each patch to contain the renaming of the
header file as well as all files in which each renamed function/member variable
is reused.

 this would at least allow those to be done as entirely independent separate
patches that would clearly have nothing to do with the actual functionality.

 they could in fact be done under a separate bug report, so as to shorten the
length of this one.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #125 from Daniel Jelinski <djelinski1(a)gmail.com> 2013-01-03 15:13:35 CST ---
(In reply to comment #123)
> (In reply to comment #119)
> > You can (and should) split it some more. Changing flush deserves its separate
> > patch, and so does changing ioctl.
>
> You mean split patch 5 more?

Yes. If some app breaks after your commits, you'll get a regression test
pointing to one of them. The smaller that patch is, the better for you. Apps
tend to break on good commits too, so even if you're sure everything is OK,
splitting is always a good idea.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #126 from Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <lkcl(a)lkcl.net> 2013-01-03 15:30:22 CST ---
(In reply to comment #125)
> (In reply to comment #123)
> > (In reply to comment #119)
> > > You can (and should) split it some more. Changing flush deserves its separate
> > > patch, and so does changing ioctl.
> >
> > You mean split patch 5 more?
>
> Yes. If some app breaks after your commits, you'll get a regression test
> pointing to one of them. The smaller that patch is, the better for you. Apps
> tend to break on good commits too, so even if you're sure everything is OK,
> splitting is always a good idea.

daniel: this is a... a... severely fundamental and critical functional patch
which should have been done a long, *long* time ago.  i'm staggered that
the NamedPipes functionality wasn't designed right from the start (and i mean
when the very first implementation of NamedPipes was ever conceived) to
be properly compliant with the NamedPipes specification.

how in hell's teeth's name wine got as far as it has without having proper
datagram support in NamedPipes is an absolute mystery.

the point is: as adam points out, this is very much an all-or-nothing patch.
if it works, it will "just work".  if it fails, it will fail so spectacularly
and so early that it will be blindingly f*****g obvious, it's *that*
fundamental.

NamedPipes are used at the absolute most fundamental level by the
infrastructure
of wine.  \PIPE\svcctl for example - to start even the very first services? 
registry access?  all done through named pipes (\PIPE\winreg).

if this patch didn't do its job, wine wouldn't work... period.

if with this patch you can start wine, it's called so many times even at the
very startup that that is, in its own way, its own test.

the patch is so fundamental to wine that not even the tests that i created
which test the functionality of this patch can be run unless the functionality
itself has been correctly implemented in the patch.

after startup, if there is even one single 3rd party program that fails because
of this patch, i would actually be more inclined to start any investigation
with that application more than i would investigate this patch as the cause.

i'm emphasising the same point in several different ways, but is it clear that
this is very much an all-or-nothing patch which either works 100% or fails
spectacularly 100%?

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #127 from Adam Martinson <adam.r.martinson(a)gmail.com> 2013-01-03 21:04:20 CST ---
(In reply to comment #125)
> (In reply to comment #123)
> > You mean split patch 5 more?
>
> Yes. If some app breaks after your commits, you'll get a regression test
> pointing to one of them. The smaller that patch is, the better for you. Apps
> tend to break on good commits too, so even if you're sure everything is OK,
> splitting is always a good idea.

I know that splitting is good xD  But that's the one where you stop getting a
pipe_instance handle and start getting a pipe_end handle for the server end. 
Those functions *must* change at the same time or stuff breaks.  Is there a way
to get around that that I'm not seeing?


(In reply to comment #124)
> well, alexandre already asked for tests to be carried out, and you've already
>  explained that tests cannot be carried out unless the *entire* patch set is
>  applied and accepted, because it's so fundamental.

They don't all have to be committed at once.  The 1st one can stand on its own.
 2-6 are the 1st chunk, redesigning the backend.  7-9 are the 2nd chunk,
implementing {Get|Set}NamedPipeHandleState() and the FILE_PIPE_INFORMATION
stuff.  10 is the last chunk, I just don't know how to split that one without
breaking stuff.

He didn't have any problem with the tests that I recall, he just wanted the
major patch from the 1st chunk split AFAIK, so I don't think a switch is
needed.
> it's not obvious just from the patch what's going on.  is it *only* renaming? 
> if so, what gets renamed to what?  if you only renamed one at a time, the
> number of lines being changed would be smaller, so comparisons would be easy.

The patches that say (no-op) are only renames.
part 1:
ps_connected_server => ps_connected
ps_wait_disconnect => ps_disconnected_client
client => end
part 2:
instances => numinstances
server => instance
servers => instances
event => event_empty
> the sheer number of things being renamed here actually removes *entire*
> functions and replaces them with ones that are... identical?  are they?  i
> don't know, and i can't tell.

If you use a diff tool that shows changes inside lines it's easier.  I'd rather
not create a whole bunch of no-op patches unless Alexandre thinks it's
necessary.
> this would at least allow those to be done as entirely independent separate
> patches that would clearly have nothing to do with the actual functionality.

That's what the (no-op) in the description is for ;-)

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

Adam Martinson <adam.r.martinson(a)gmail.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Attachment #43063|Patches (10)                |Patches (10) - ignore the
        description|                            |duplicate 0005-* (oops)

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #128 from Daniel Jelinski <djelinski1(a)gmail.com> 2013-01-04 00:12:02 CST ---
(In reply to comment #127)
> I know that splitting is good xD  But that's the one where you stop getting a
> pipe_instance handle and start getting a pipe_end handle for the server end. 
> Those functions *must* change at the same time or stuff breaks.  Is there a way
> to get around that that I'm not seeing?

Make pipe_instance_flush read:
{
if(inst->server->fd)
{
  pipe_end_flush(inst->server);
  return;
}
no_flush();
}
or something along these lines. Same for pipe_instance_ioctl. When you switch
to pipe_end_fd_ops, these lines will never be called, so you may remove them in
a later patch (which can even be a separate one).

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #129 from Adam Martinson <adam.r.martinson(a)gmail.com> 2013-01-04 00:20:42 CST ---
(In reply to comment #128)
> or something along these lines. Same for pipe_instance_ioctl. When you switch
> to pipe_end_fd_ops, these lines will never be called, so you may remove them in
> a later patch (which can even be a separate one).

That works for flush I suppose, ioctl will be a little trickier but I think it
should be doable.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

rmlipman(a)gmail.com changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |rmlipman(a)gmail.com

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

trilavia(a)gmail.com changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |trilavia(a)gmail.com

--- Comment #130 from trilavia(a)gmail.com 2013-01-20 12:10:06 CST ---
Any chance for ubuntu 12.10 wine 1.5 package patched for this bug? I can't
compile wine on my system. Thanks in advance!

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

nE0sIghT <update.microsoft(a)mail.ru> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |update.microsoft(a)mail.ru

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

Jonny Barnes <jonnybarnes(a)gmail.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |jonnybarnes(a)gmail.com

--- Comment #131 from Jonny Barnes <jonnybarnes(a)gmail.com> 2013-03-30 11:38:02 CDT ---
This appears to have stopped working. I'm ignoring the
`0005-server-Use-the-same-fd-ops-for-both-ends-of-a-named-.patch` patch file.

Once I've cloned the git repository (--depth 1 if that makes anydifference) and
start applying patches, it fails at patch 7. The output from `patch -p1 <
0007._.patch` is located at http://pastebin.ca/2345630

The contents of include/wine/server_protocol.h.rej is:

--- include/wine/server_protocol.h
+++ include/wine/server_protocol.h
@@ -5729,6 +5745,6 @@
     struct set_suspend_context_reply set_suspend_context_reply;
 };

-#define SERVER_PROTOCOL_VERSION 437
+#define SERVER_PROTOCOL_VERSION 438

 #endif /* __WINE_WINE_SERVER_PROTOCOL_H */

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #132 from Dan Kegel <dank(a)kegel.com> 2013-03-30 12:33:24 CDT ---
If that's the only problem, you can just increment the server protocol by hand
with a text editor.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #133 from Jonny Barnes <jonnybarnes(a)gmail.com> 2013-03-30 12:46:40 CDT ---
(In reply to comment #132)
> If that's the only problem, you can just increment the server protocol by hand
> with a text editor.

Looking at the latest git source, that line is now

    #define SERVER_PROTOCOL_VERSION 440

should I change that to 437 to match the patch file, or edit the patch file to
change 440 to 441 or what? I have no idea what SERVER_PROTOCOL_VERSION does.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #134 from Dan Kegel <dank(a)kegel.com> 2013-03-30 12:54:25 CDT ---
It just keeps programs built against new wine from trying to run on old wine.
Just make it one higher than anything ever seen before.  Or set it to 9999.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #135 from Jonny Barnes <jonnybarnes(a)gmail.com> 2013-03-30 14:39:44 CDT ---
(In reply to comment #134)
> It just keeps programs built against new wine from trying to run on old wine.
> Just make it one higher than anything ever seen before.  Or set it to 9999.

Working, thanks Dan.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #136 from Henri Verbeet <hverbeet(a)gmail.com> 2013-04-01 07:15:20 CDT ---
Just for what it's worth, you should just about never patch server_protocol.h.
It's supposed to be generated from protocol.def by tools/make_requests.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

Kyle Devir <kyle.devir(a)gmx.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |kyle.devir(a)gmx.com

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

vegarh(a)gmail.com changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |vegarh(a)gmail.com

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

napoliste(a)gmail.com changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |napoliste(a)gmail.com

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

Austin English <austinenglish(a)gmail.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Blocks|                            |33583

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

Alexandre Julliard <julliard(a)winehq.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |joe_rocks(a)hotmail.com

--- Comment #137 from Alexandre Julliard <julliard(a)winehq.org> 2013-05-25 16:26:07 CDT ---
*** Bug 33656 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #138 from Berillions <berillions(a)gmail.com> 2013-05-30 15:38:37 CDT ---
Impossible to apply the patch #10 with the actual wine git version
wine-1.5.31-97-gc6d3075

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

Kjetil Ness <nesskjetil(a)hotmail.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |nesskjetil(a)hotmail.com

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

Kody <khicks545(a)gmail.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |khicks545(a)gmail.com

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

Andrey <andrey.gursky(a)e-mail.ua> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |andrey.gursky(a)e-mail.ua

--- Comment #139 from Andrey <andrey.gursky(a)e-mail.ua> 2013-07-18 09:58:02 CDT ---
(In reply to comment #138)
> Impossible to apply the patch #10 with the actual wine git version
> wine-1.5.31-97-gc6d3075

Patch 0007 alters include/wine/server_protocol.h and 0010 too. The later is
unneeded.

For 1.6rc5 you can edit the patch 0007 and replace as foolows:

-#define SERVER_PROTOCOL_VERSION 440
+#define SERVER_PROTOCOL_VERSION 999

In the patch 0010 you can either remove these changes or just replace as
follows:

-#define SERVER_PROTOCOL_VERSION 999
+#define SERVER_PROTOCOL_VERSION 999

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #140 from Andrey <andrey.gursky(a)e-mail.ua> 2013-07-18 10:05:37 CDT ---
I've tried the patches with 1.6rc5: they compiled well but the installation of
vcredist_x86_2012 failed.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #141 from Andrey <andrey.gursky(a)e-mail.ua> 2013-07-18 10:06:36 CDT ---
Created attachment 45327
  --> http://bugs.winehq.org/attachment.cgi?id=45327
wine 1.6rc5 shell output

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #142 from Andrey <andrey.gursky(a)e-mail.ua> 2013-07-18 10:07:31 CDT ---
Created attachment 45328
  --> http://bugs.winehq.org/attachment.cgi?id=45328
vcredist_x86_2012 installation log

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

Luis Zaldivar <luis.zaldivar(a)gmail.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |luis.zaldivar(a)gmail.com

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

Amine <amineleblaugrana(a)hotmail.fr> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |amineleblaugrana(a)hotmail.fr

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #143 from Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <lkcl(a)lkcl.net> 2013-07-30 19:47:18 CDT ---
andrey: that means that there's a case which hasn't been tested for, yet.
tracking it down is gonna be fuuun.

could i ask you please to do a "vanilla" (unpatched) install log
and to then go through the two log files, doing a side-by-side
compare to find the most likely discrepancy that could have caused
the failure on the patched version?

it should be pretty obvious: this is pretty fundamental stuff:
NamedPipes is at an absolute critical low-level in wine and w32
so it should be blindingly obvious which call is failing, it's
just finding the right one and that means doing a side-by-side
compare.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #144 from Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <lkcl(a)lkcl.net> 2013-07-30 19:50:22 CDT ---
apologies, andrey: i meant "wine debug logs", not vcredist install logs.

if you could kindly run (in completely new/fresh installs) enabling
wine debug logging on each install, one patched and one unpatched.

you're looking for debug messages from the NamedPipe create, writes,
reads etc.  you might have to ask on the wine mailing list for help
on how to enable wine debug logging without completely overwhelming
yourself!  it's been a while since i did this so i can't recall
exactly how it's done.

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

oli.huber(a)gmail.com changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |oli.huber(a)gmail.com

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

Adam Dempsey <dempsey(a)weirdfish.net> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |dempsey(a)weirdfish.net

-- 
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

Anastasius Focht <focht(a)gmx.net> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Blocks|                            |17273
         Depends on|17273                       |

-- 
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

Sylvain Petreolle <spetreolle(a)yahoo.fr> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |spetreolle(a)yahoo.fr

-- 
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

Anastasius Focht <focht(a)gmx.net> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |jeanluc.malet(a)gmail.com

--- Comment #145 from Anastasius Focht <focht(a)gmx.net> ---
*** Bug 21840 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

-- 
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

Anastasius Focht <focht(a)gmx.net> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |dmbohdan(a)gmail.com

--- Comment #146 from Anastasius Focht <focht(a)gmx.net> ---
*** Bug 23914 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

-- 
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

jeanluc.malet(a)gmail.com changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|jeanluc.malet(a)gmail.com     |

-- 
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #147 from Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <lkcl(a)lkcl.net> ---
guys,

the work adding proper named pipes support is now five years old.  a large
number of programs critically depend on this working.  there have been four
other duplicate bugs and there are two blockers, one of which has *eighteen*
further duplicates.

i did not tackle this particular functionality without a good reason, because i
know how critical and low-level it is.  i am amazed that it was not tackled
over a decade ago when wine was first starting out.

now, one of the problems is that because it is so low-level, it is actually
very hard to even get wine executables started to the point where tests can be
run.

to make that clear: this is such low-level functionality that even *STARTING
WINE* is itself a pretty much full and complete test.

to reiterate: by the time you get to the point where the test executables can
*be run*, there will have *already* been hundreds of function calls involving
NamedPipe MessageMode datagrams.

additionally, i already pointed out that the use of sockets is not very
appropriate.  the GNU/Linux OS and the BSD OSes simply do not have the
fundamental OS-level concept of reliable streamed datagrams, and emulating them
in a single-threaded environment (wineserver) is a bitch and a half.

also, i have pointed out that to use sockets you need to make wineserver
multi-threaded.  mr alexandre jiullard has told everyone that everything that i
say is total shit, and i am not interested in educating mr jiullard.

also, i have pointed out that if you keep using a single-threaded wineserver
the only other way to properly implement reliable streamed datagrams (in a fast
manner) is to put the data into shared memory (then use fixed-length
(semaphored) message encoding via wineserver to communicate between user-level
processes where that data may be obtained).  mr jiullard has also said that
this idea is shit. i am not intereested in educating mr jiullard.

you _could_ implement streamed reliable datagrams in a single-threaded
wineserver by placing the datagram's data into files (one file per packet) and,
again, use the single-threaded wineserver to communicate with a fixed-length
(semaphore-protected) message where the datagram's data could be obtained. 
however this _would_ actually be shit, because it would be unbelievably slow.

so the summary is: we basically know where the problem lies, and it is in the
attitude of mr jiullard.  he doesn't like the fact that i have expertise in
this area.  until he gets over his psychiatric problem this bug is going to
continue to be blocked and a huge number of applications - some of them quite
prominent - will be excluded from the list of applications that wine is capable
of running.

-- 
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

Brandon Corujo <haku08879(a)gmail.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |haku08879(a)gmail.com

-- 
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #148 from Adam Martinson <adam.r.martinson(a)gmail.com> ---
(In reply to Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton from comment #147)
> ...rant...

Luke, if you really are the expert you seem to think you are, help me figure
out why the patches which use Julliard's proposed solution cause problems in
some apps that work fine without them (see the comments in Bug 17273).  You
want this fixed?  That's how you can help.

-- 
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #149 from Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <lkcl(a)lkcl.net> ---
hi adam,

i've been investigating alternative options.  one of them is posix ipc queues.
posix ipc queues have exactly the same semantics (itliterally) as message-mode
named pipes.  there are however a number of problems with posix ipc queues.
firstly, they tend not to have been implemented correctly.  secondly,
clean-up is a bitch.  there is typically no way to *enumerate* the ipc
queues despite them being like files!  thirdly, the limit is around
8k whereas namedpipe in messagemode is something like a 64k message size
limit.

so, using posix ipc queues would be a bit fraught, but technically would
be [one of the very few] the correct things to use, even as a means to pass
e.g. just the length of the message to be read from the socket.  what is
nice about posix ipc queues is that they have an equivalent of poll, so you
can tell whether there is a message waiting, at least, or, better, use them
to block the user process (pending a message), instead of blocking the (single)
wineserver process (which you would otherwise have to multi-thread in order
to get the correct semantics required, here).

but, first, we have to get jiullard to stop putting pride, anger and
hate ahead of technical analysis and decisions.  someone else
(other than me) basically needs to stand up to him.

-- 
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #150 from Dan Kegel <dank(a)kegel.com> ---
Luke, Alexandre is the maintainer of the winehq tree.  It's his (paid!) job,
and he's good at it.

As Adam says, your best move for now is to let the wookie win, and help
debug Adam's existing patchset.

-- 
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #151 from Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <lkcl(a)lkcl.net> ---
hi dan,

i had time, back when i was working on this.  if i had received
encouraging responses from jiullard instead of one-sentence
"you're a dick, fuck off" style responses then i would have
worked hard - at the time - to come up with a solution.

so jiullard needs to learn - and everyone else needs to
understand - that he is *not* good at what he does.

if i was paid to work on wine, then *regardless* of my
personal opinion of an individual's nature if they showed
the slightest inclination and enthusiasm to help out on
such a complex project i would not hesitate to encourage
them to do so, dealing with anything where they stepped
out of line as a separate issue.

we know that NamedPipes is a highly complex area that should
have been tackled a decade ago.  there are very few
people in the world who a) understand low-level NT
b) understand low-level POSIX/Unix.

so i am simply not prepared to put up with shit - for no
money - in such a complex technical area.

discouraging people from contributing is massively
counterproductive.

get him to publicly apologise and i might consider
helping out again.

but otherwise? why should i bother? i have enough to do
without having to put up with his attitude.

so, sorry dan - no dice.

-- 
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #152 from Adam Martinson <adam.r.martinson(a)gmail.com> ---
(In reply to Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton from comment #151)
> ...rant...

Filling up this page with the details of why Alexandre pisses you off doesn't
count as helping; it just adds useless text to wade through for anyone trying
to work on this bug.

-- 
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

Simon <swdevelop1981(a)gmail.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |swdevelop1981(a)gmail.com

-- 
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

Jonas <webforlife(a)outlook.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |webforlife(a)outlook.com

-- 
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #153 from Jonas <webforlife(a)outlook.com> ---
I don't know much about fixing the bug, but it is quite serious.
This bug is Blocking http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17273 which means
that anything and everything using Microsoft Visual C++ 2012 or newer will not
work in wine since the 2012 redist package halts and shuts down wine.

So if there is anything that I can to do help fixing it, logs, tests, ANYTHING,
please let me know.

-- 
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

Sebastian Lackner <sebastian(a)fds-team.de> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |sebastian(a)fds-team.de

--- Comment #154 from Sebastian Lackner <sebastian(a)fds-team.de> ---
Since noone seems to be working on this anymore, we (= the Wine-compholio team)
decided to give it another try. ;-)
First of all, when taking a look at all the approaches which have been there so
far, there are immediately two things I've noticed:

* At my opinion its unlikely that AJ will accept a solution, which involves the
wineserver roundtrip time. It would decrease performance significantly compared
to all the previous wine versions, and so is probably not a good thing...

* Even if some of the implementations are probably (mostly) correct, the tests
are not sufficient to show that. A lot of corner cases are not tested at all,
for example:

- partial receiving of messages
- partial receiving from multiple threads or processes
- result of PeekNamedPipe for partial reads
- tests for very large messages (which don't fit in the system buffer)
- zero byte messages

In addition to the problems above: The current tests are in a very bad shape.
What is the purpose of something like that below? It just hides test failures
and regressions ...
--- snip ---
        if (avail != sizeof(obuf)) /* older Linux kernels only return the first
write here */
            ok(avail == sizeof(obuf) + sizeof(obuf2), "peek4 got %d bytes
available\n", avail);
--- /snip ---

I wrote all the remaining tests during the last few days, and afterwards we
evaluated all possible strategies. The best one we found (for Linux) is using a
specific feature called SO_PEEK_OFF, which is only available for kernel >= 3.4,
and allows to implement everything "almost" correct. So far we don't have a
good solution for MacOS yet, but probably there is something similar - I don't
have a Mac, so I cannot really test unfortunately.

You can find my proof-of-concept patch here (it also contains parts by Erich E.
Hoover and one test by Adam Martinson):
--> http://ix.io/dKs

Splitted version (requires ./tools/make_requests):
-->
https://github.com/compholio/wine-compholio/tree/namedpipe/patches/kernel32-...

After I've found out how to deal with the ugly existing tests (remove such
ifs?!), I'll start submitting the tests, one after each other. This might take
some more time, so please be patient ... ;) The actual implementation will
follow afterwards, and might take even some more time.
In the meantime please test my patches above, and report if it works for your
app. They should apply cleanly on wine-1.7.23-33-gc654b7b.

Regards,
Sebastian

-- 
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #155 from Austin English <austinenglish(a)gmail.com> ---
(In reply to Sebastian Lackner from comment #154)
> After I've found out how to deal with the ugly existing tests (remove such
> ifs?!), I'll start submitting the tests, one after each other. This might
> take some more time, so please be patient ... ;) The actual implementation
> will follow afterwards, and might take even some more time.
> In the meantime please test my patches above, and report if it works for
> your app. They should apply cleanly on wine-1.7.23-33-gc654b7b.

Hi Sebastian,

Thanks for tackling this. I tested the patchset against a few of the
applications reported in bug 17273, and put the results in a google doc here:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1-xOFXZDqAxzhVxcKO3YxHybxr0NF984CgZWJ...

(should be publicly viewable, let me know if it's not). The patchet worked for
a couple applications (Calibre, Football Manager 2014 Demo), but fails for some
other applications (Windows 8 SDK, Visual Studio 2012, PDFXChange Editor 3.0).

I also tested with the Python 3.1 multiprocessing test, which crashes without
the patch. With the patch, that crash disappears, but later tests fail (I
haven't looked at what those tests are doing, it could be a different failure
or testing NamedPipes in more depth).

Since a few major applications are broken, I haven't tested the others yet,
I'll wait for the next revision ;).

-- 
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #156 from Sebastian Lackner <sebastian(a)fds-team.de> ---
Thanks for testing. :) I would guess the remaining failures are caused by
either:

* the CloseHandle tests which are still todo_wine so far, or
* the fact that on linux we have a message size limit smaller than on Windows.
This can be modified by using /proc.

I'm currently updating the patches, and will add a FIXME for the message size -
this should allow manually adjusting (or at least notice when something goes
wrong). I'll also check if I can do some testing myself for those apps, which
still don't pass the test.

-- 
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

dmitrii.pukhkaiev(a)yandex.ua changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |dmitrii.pukhkaiev(a)yandex.ua

-- 
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #157 from Sebastian Lackner <sebastian(a)fds-team.de> ---
Time for more testing! :) I have just updated the patches:

https://github.com/compholio/wine-compholio/tree/namedpipe/patches/kernel32-...
(requires ./tools/make_requests)

The main remaining problem with the installers was that they try to change the
named pipe handle state before a client has connected (which fails, because
only a pseudo_fd has been assigned at that point). The updated patchset stores
the state in the server until the socket is finally created. Besides that I've
also cleaned up and reordered some parts, and have added support for
nonblocking named pipe modes.

I've tested with PDFXChange Editor and the Windows 8 SDK so far. In both cases
the patches let it start properly, but in order to finish the installation
successfully, you'll also need Erichs ACL patches:

https://github.com/compholio/wine-compholio/tree/master/patches/server-Store...
https://github.com/compholio/wine-compholio/tree/master/patches/server-Inher...
https://github.com/compholio/wine-compholio/tree/master/patches/server-Misc_...
https://github.com/compholio/wine-compholio/tree/master/patches/shell32-Defa...
(requires ./tools/make_requests and autoreconf, run ./configure with
--with-xattr)

For those that want to test with _all_ the patches I mentioned above - here is
a merged patchfile:
http://ix.io/dQC

Regards,
Sebastian

-- 
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #158 from Berillions <berillions(a)gmail.com> ---
Hi Sebastian,

With your patches, the vcrun 2012 setup finnish successfully. I must to try
with my game "Warlock 2 : The Exiled" which needs this application to run
correctly.

-- 
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

http://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #159 from Sebastian Lackner <sebastian(a)fds-team.de> ---
Concerning "Tu Go": The patches also seem to improve it, but you have to set
the Wineprefix to Windows 7. If you don't do that you'll see no Window, and
just get a message in the logs: "Condition 'VersionNT >= v6.1' evaluates to
false.".
Unfortunately, even with the Wineprefix set to Windows 7, it still crashes
later, during the installation. I suspect that this is some kind of error with
Mono.

-- 
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #160 from Sebastian Lackner <sebastian(a)fds-team.de> ---
I decided to check what the remaining differences are between my implementation
and Adams patchset. I've rebased most of his patches for 1.7.14, and have just
added my tests as a last patch (you can split it with 'git am'):
http://ix.io/dT6

As suspected, there are various differences in the implementation, test results
are here: 
http://ix.io/dT5 .

Failing tests in my implementation (and marked as todo_wine):
* Its impossible to handle specific 0 byte reads correctly (without kernel
patches), Adams implementation works well for those.
* Based on the design decision to use SOCK_SEQPACKET there is an upper message
size limit (which can be changed in /proc).
* Some overlapped stuff needs to be fixed, my patches don't touch this part.

Failing tests in Adams implementation:
* Writing to a pipe doesn't seem to block if the pipe "is full" - not sure if
there are any applications that really needs this though.
* Wrong error code when pipe is empty in non-blocking mode, should be
ERROR_NO_DATA, but is ERROR_NO_MORE_ITEMS, could maybe confuse some
applications?
* Doesn't fix all GetNamedPipeHandleState issues.
* ReadFile succeeds reading from INVALID_HANDLE_VALUE? Could also confuse some
applications, when they depend the correct error code.

This is my attempt to quickly fix the issues 2-4 in his implementation by just
adding one additional patch on top of it:
http://ix.io/dTc

Regards,
Sebastian

-- 
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

Martin Baute <solar(a)rootdirectory.de> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |solar(a)rootdirectory.de

-- 
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

Krzysztof Dębski <fantom15(a)poczta.onet.pl> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |fantom15(a)poczta.onet.pl

--- Comment #161 from Krzysztof Dębski <fantom15(a)poczta.onet.pl> ---
I think that SOCK_SEQPACKET is supported on FreeBSD
(http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/svn-src-head/2009-October/010832.html) but
the maximum size of a message can be a problem:

$ cat /proc/sys/net/core/wmem_max
163840

We may just ask users to raise the limit if some of their appliactions fail.

Have you checked your patch on an older version on Linux (without SO_PEEK_OFF)?

-- 
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #162 from Sebastian Lackner <sebastian(a)fds-team.de> ---
When SO_PEEK_OFF is not supported, then my implementation will fall back to
SOCK_STREAM sockets. This is also the behaviour for kernels < 3.4. Without
having SO_PEEK_OFF its not possible to receive parts of a message, so it will
not be used at all, to prevent regressions. In this case the patches will only
fix the SetNamedPipeHandleState issue, but not all the other details (and will
print fixmes). For FreeBSD we would need a similar functionality. If someone
experienced with the FreeBSD kernel has some time, feel free to join
#wine-compholio (on freenode) to discuss the details about possible
implementations. We need either a completely different solution (if available),
or will have to reimplement SO_PEEK_OFF there.

BTW, short status update: The first four relatively small Wine patches (which
should be definitely correct) are currently waiting to be reviewed. Besides
that I'm just updating some later patches in the series, some additional tests
revealed that overlapped stuff doesn't work correctly yet, with both Adams and
my patchset. Moreover we're preparing some kernel patches, we discovered some
weird behaviour for zero byte reads, which can be considered a kernel bug... ;)

-- 
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #163 from Adam Martinson <adam.r.martinson(a)gmail.com> ---
(In reply to Sebastian Lackner from comment #162)
> Moreover we're preparing some kernel patches...

Nice to see somebody working on this again =)  A few notes from my time on
this:

If you need to patch the native kernel to get your implementation to work, it's
probably the wrong way to go.  As you noted I played around with a
SOCK_SEQPACKET implementation, and ditched it because of some of the problems
you've run into.

The reason I implemented message mode through the server is because that's what
AJ suggested.  I think that's probably the easiest & most straightforward way
to do it.

If you're really set on using native pipes/sockets, I would take a look at
encoding the data in a normal stream socket.  Basically save yourself an
end-of-message bit out of each byte, and shift the rest of the data
accordingly.  You'll end up with an overhead of 1 byte per 7 sent, which should
give you acceptable performance.  Zero-length writes would become a single byte
with just that end-of-message bit set.  You'd obviously need to translate
lengths, which should be trivial.

Any questions, etc feel free to send me an email.
~Adam

-- 
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #164 from Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <lkcl(a)lkcl.net> ---
(In reply to Adam Martinson from comment #163)
> (In reply to Sebastian Lackner from comment #162)
> The reason I implemented message mode through the server is because that's
> what AJ suggested.  I think that's probably the easiest & most
> straightforward way to do it.
>
> If you're really set on using native pipes/sockets, I would take a look at
> encoding the data in a normal stream socket.

unfortunately, that is the implementation that cannot work, because you
 can have multiple readers of the socket, none of which may coordinate properly
 about which may read data and which may read OOB data, which is the
 whole reason why i created the "one socket pair per message" prototype
 in the first place.

 if you think "ok then, if that's not possible let's do it in the server"
 then that *also* is not possible because the server must never block
 and unfortunately you need blocking in order to create the blocking
 semantics needed by the clients... and you may *not* block in the server.

 this is why i said - right back after i stopped working on this - that it
 is necessary to make wineserver a multi-threaded server because you can
 allocate one thread per blocking-read.

 and the reason why i stopped is because AJ was such a complete dick,
 giving blanket "fuck off" answers instead of listening to sound logical
 reasoning.

 which is why he should be fired from the project, if he cannot listen
 to simple logical reasoning, no matter how much redesign work is needed.

 AJ if you cannot listen to simple logical reasoning, even if it means
 that a lot of work may be needed, then perhaps it is time for you to
 quit the wine project.

 sorry, all - been round this loop a number of times.

 and, to answer your earlier comments, adam: if the project leaders are
 completely discouraging and disparaging, why should i spend *my* time
 interacting with them *at all*?

 and before you answer that, adam: consider that i am one of the very rare
 people who tells things as they are.  no sugar-coating.  sometimes
 even though people don't like to hear what needs to be done, someone
 still has to say it.

-- 
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #165 from Adam Martinson <adam.r.martinson(a)gmail.com> ---
(In reply to Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton from comment #164)
> and, to answer your earlier comments, adam: if the project leaders are
>  completely discouraging and disparaging, why should i spend *my* time
>  interacting with them *at all*?
>
> and before you answer that, adam: consider that i am one of the very rare
>  people who tells things as they are.  no sugar-coating.  sometimes
>  even though people don't like to hear what needs to be done, someone
>  still has to say it.

Luke: I don't think anyone is suggesting/requesting you spend any time on this.
 Go away; you're not helping.  That's my un-sugar-coated opinion.

-- 
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #166 from Sebastian Lackner <sebastian(a)fds-team.de> ---
Hi,

@Adam: The main advantage of using the wineserver is that such a solution is
platform independent. Nevertheless your approach had several disadvantages -
writing was always nonblocking, it was theoretically possible to flood the
wineserver with too many messages, so that no further memory can be allocated,
... besides that it didn't follow the wineserver style convention, and used
wrong or no error codes at some places, but thats easy to fix of course.

If we want to use a wineserver solution, then we have to do a lot more work, to
implement everything properly (blocking writes, but different partial writes
after each other shouldn't result in interleaved output, ...). I personally
would prefer having a kernel solution, but at the end its not really my
decision. The next step will be to get all my >1000 lines of additional tests
upstream, and talking to some kernel developers in the meantime.

Encoding the "end-of-message" flag in the data stream is not possible, since
you have no control how many bytes are returned ... unless you do a peek first,
but then its subject to race conditions.

@Luke: One socket pair per message also doesn't sound like a good solution,
what about weird programs sending one byte after each other? Moreover in byte
read mode the messages have to be merged again, which would also lead to race
conditions, when NtReadFile only operates only on one socket at a specific
time.

I have also no idea why you think its not possible to implement "blocking"
behaviour in the wineserver. It is possible of course, and in fact used already
in some places, it just works by allocating a wait handle, and then temporarily
returning control to the application. While inside a wineserver call no APCs
can be handled, so it wouldn't be a good idea anyway, and wouldn't even work in
a multithreaded environment. A multithreaded wineserver would be good for
performance reasons, but it makes a lot of other things much more difficult,
and I doubt that anyone would be able to change all that without introducing
new regressions.

And, it was already said multiple times: Please just leave out all your insults
and anger, this bug report is not the right place for that. Even if you have a
different opinion, you have to accept that Alexandre is the maintainer, and he
decides which features are good enough to included in the official version.
Noone keeps you from adding experimental features in your own builds.

Regards,
Sebastian

-- 
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #167 from Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <lkcl(a)lkcl.net> ---
(In reply to Adam Martinson from comment #165)
> Luke: I don't think anyone is suggesting/requesting you spend any time on
> this.  Go away; you're not helping.  That's my un-sugar-coated opinion.

appreciated your honesty.  unfortunately i have a duty and responsibility
 towards the wider software libre community that extends beyond way beyond
 what people think of me.

 so, apologies, but i am duty-bound to raise the issues that individual
 communities (and individual leaders) do not wish to discuss.

 within each software libre project there is a general belief that an
 individual leader is "God", and that their word is absolute law.

 however within the wider context those "Gods" end up with very narrow
 focusses that keep projects from expanding.

 so, sorry adam, but i am not going away.

l.

-- 
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #168 from Austin English <austinenglish(a)gmail.com> ---
(In reply to Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton from comment #167)
> (In reply to Adam Martinson from comment #165)
> > Luke: I don't think anyone is suggesting/requesting you spend any time on
> > this.  Go away; you're not helping.  That's my un-sugar-coated opinion.
>
> appreciated your honesty.  unfortunately i have a duty and responsibility
>  towards the wider software libre community that extends beyond way beyond
>  what people think of me.
>
> so, apologies, but i am duty-bound to raise the issues that individual
>  communities (and individual leaders) do not wish to discuss.
>
> within each software libre project there is a general belief that an
>  individual leader is "God", and that their word is absolute law.
>
> however within the wider context those "Gods" end up with very narrow
>  focusses that keep projects from expanding.
>
> so, sorry adam, but i am not going away.
>
> l.

Discussions and alternative viewpoints are allowed, but outright rudeness and
cursing towards developers or users is not appropriate behavior on winehq.org.

I'm happy to enforce that via bugzilla bans, if necessary.

-- 
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

Jay Faulkner <jayleefaulkner(a)gmail.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |jayleefaulkner(a)gmail.com

-- 
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

silva_daniel25(a)hotmail.com <silva_daniel25(a)hotmail.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |silva_daniel25(a)hotmail.com

-- 
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

Anastasius Focht <focht(a)gmx.net> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |imwellcushtymelike(a)gmail.co
                   |                            |m

--- Comment #169 from Anastasius Focht <focht(a)gmx.net> ---
*** Bug 22680 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

-- 
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams

https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

JKAbrams <j(a)jkabrams.se> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |j(a)jkabrams.se

-- 
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] Multiple applications and games need support for named pipe message mode (NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams)

https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

Anastasius Focht <focht(a)gmx.net> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Version|unspecified                 |1.1.14
            Summary|NamedPipe datagrams need to |Multiple applications and
                   |be _really_ datagrams       |games need support for
                   |                            |named pipe message mode
                   |                            |(NamedPipe datagrams need
                   |                            |to be _really_ datagrams)

--- Comment #170 from Anastasius Focht <focht(a)gmx.net> ---
Hello folks,

since this is the only (meta)bug left I'm refining the summary a bit while
retaining the original text to better target dupes here.

Feel free to reference the bug in appdb entries as needed.

I've successfully tested Adobe CS5.x product installers with the current
patchset from 'Wine-staging' repository, 'namedpipe' branch.

https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=22680#c20

Regards

-- 
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] Multiple applications and games need support for named pipe message mode (NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams)

https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #171 from Andrey <andrey.gursky(a)e-mail.ua> ---
(In reply to Anastasius Focht)
> I cherry picked/rebased some patches from Wine-Staging (formerly 
> Wine-Compholio) 'namedpipe' branch: https://github.com/wine-compholio/wine-staging/tree/namedpipe/patches/kernel...
> to Wine 1.7.31+ and it made the CS5 installer succeed in clean 32-bit WINEPREFIX.

Hi Anastasius,

do you maintain these rebased patches on some public VCS server?


(In reply to Sebastian Lackner)

Hi Sebastian,

do you plan to update namedpipe branch?


Regards,
Andrey

-- 
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] Multiple applications and games need support for named pipe message mode (NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams)

https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

Anastasius Focht <focht(a)gmx.net> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |marius.andreiana(a)gmail.com

--- Comment #172 from Anastasius Focht <focht(a)gmx.net> ---
*** Bug 25955 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

-- 
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] Multiple applications and games need support for named pipe message mode (NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams)

https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #173 from Sebastian Lackner <sebastian(a)fds-team.de> ---
(In reply to Andrey from comment #171)
> (In reply to Anastasius Focht)
> > I cherry picked/rebased some patches from Wine-Staging (formerly 
> > Wine-Compholio) 'namedpipe' branch: https://github.com/wine-compholio/wine-staging/tree/namedpipe/patches/kernel...
> > to Wine 1.7.31+ and it made the CS5 installer succeed in clean 32-bit WINEPREFIX.
>
> Hi Anastasius,
>
> do you maintain these rebased patches on some public VCS server?
>
> (In reply to Sebastian Lackner)
>
> Hi Sebastian,
>
> do you plan to update namedpipe branch?
>
> Regards,
> Andrey

Sorry, I didn't see your reply earlier, my mail program thought it was spam
somehow O_o.

I've just rebased the patches and added them to the main branch - this means
they'll now be rebased (like the rest of our staging patchset) with every new
upstream change:

https://github.com/wine-compholio/wine-staging/tree/master/patches/kernel32-...

Unfortunately FreeBSD is still not supported, but it should at least compile
now (have added some additional #ifdefs). If some experienced FreeBSD guy has
any idea how to provide the same functionality, feel free to talk to us in
#wine-staging.

-- 
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] Multiple applications and games need support for named pipe message mode (NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams)

https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

Linards <linards.liepins(a)gmail.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |linards.liepins(a)gmail.com

--- Comment #174 from Linards <linards.liepins(a)gmail.com> ---
Wow ... there was a lot of heat in the 2012' :)

Anywhow - whats the status? Did the patches land in 1.7.31+ in upstream ?

-- 
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] Multiple applications and games need support for named pipe message mode (NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams)

https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #175 from Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <lkcl(a)lkcl.net> ---
(In reply to Linards from comment #174)
> Wow ... there was a lot of heat in the 2012' :)

yep - there's a long-standing history of people getting unnecessarily
angry in the software libre community, and wine is no exception.

i'm able to think things through logically several steps ahead: for some
reason people in the software libre world don't like that.  i think
probably because too far ahead they get lost, ignore the intermediate
logical reasoning chain, and then think i'm "ordering" them what to do
because in their mind there's no possible supporting evidence for the
conclusion that's been reached.

best thing you can do linards is let them get on with it, and learn
from their mistakes.
> Anywhow - whats the status? Did the patches land in 1.7.31+ in upstream ?

if they're platform-specific and expecting other platforms such as
freebsd to add kernel support specifically, solely and exclusively
so that the current proposed patch will work, then i certainly hope
absolutely not.  additionally, relying on a very very specific and
obscure and not very well documented implementation of TCP that happens
to be present in *current* versions of the linux kernel would be
extremely fragile for something as important as this feature.

basically linards to solve this properly and in a multi-platform way
that's reliable, wineserver needs to go multi-threaded.  the "waiting"
that's needed for each named pipe can then be implemented by a thread,
blocking on an internal socket exclusive to that thread.  you can't
let wineserver block (EVER.  it would be fatal), and you can't use any
other posix socket tricks because posix *specifically* doesn't have
anything like NamedPipes.

there does exist a shared memory api which has very similar characteristics
to NamedPipes, but unfortunately most posix implementations are not
very good (because nobody really uses them).  for example, all shared
memory handles are global, but once they're created you can't even
globally list them to find out what was created let alone find out
_what_ created it!  which is insane, as the only way to clean up a system
of old shm file handles would be to reboot it.

now, when i mentioned that to solve this properly in a multi-platform
way, wineserver would need to go multithreaded, alexandre (the paid
project leader) went absolutely ballistic.  he's been forcing people to
explore other options, ever since.

i realise that making wineserver multithreaded is a huge step. however
it's one that really should have been done right from the start.  the
NT kernel is pre-emptive and multi-threaded, and making wineserver *not*
emulate that has some unintended side-effects that result in very obscure
performance degradation in certain multi-threaded userspace w32/w64
applications.  but, as a first implementation, i see no reason why the
core infrastructure should not be added, but then *all* functions
(except NamedPipes) made non-reentrant (as if wineserver were a single
process).

so the problem, linards, is that this is a complex issue of endeavouring
to implement a kernel-level feature of one OS (NT) in *userspace* of POSIX
OSes (GNU/Linux, FreeBSD, Solaris) in a multi-platform portable and
*reliable* way.  those requirements leave you with a total of *one* way
discovered and proposed so far... and that one way has been flat-out
rejected by the lead developer with absolutely no discussion whatsover.

the only reason why i have continued the discussion this far is because
i have absolutely no emotional or other invested interest in the proceedings.
i see something, i speak up.  i won't say that i don't care what people
think of me if i speak up: if i happen to care what people think of me
it *genuinely* takes *second place* to speaking my mind.

the rest of the people involved however have some form of vested interest in
ensuring their long-term involvement with this project, and that means that
they have to keep their heads down.  if the leader (alexandre juillard)
dictates "no, this will not happen", then for the sake of wishing to remain
involved with the project, they bow to his will, regardless of the
consequences.

this isn't healthy - for them, for alexandre, or for the wine project itself,
but that's what they've chosen to do.  you or i can provide some external
insight informing everyone that that's what's happening, but ultimately
linards they have to sort it out for themselves.

-- 
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] Multiple applications and games need support for named pipe message mode (NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams)

https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

Michael Müller <michael(a)fds-team.de> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |STAGED
                 CC|                            |michael(a)fds-team.de
    Staged patchset|                            |https://github.com/wine-com
                   |                            |pholio/wine-staging/tree/ma
                   |                            |ster/patches/kernel32-Named
                   |                            |_Pipe

-- 
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] Multiple applications and games need support for named pipe message mode (NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams)

https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #176 from Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <lkcl(a)lkcl.net> ---
http://tech.slashdot.org/story/15/10/04/216221/openindiana-hipster-201510-ke...

so here is an example of a libre OS that is still available, and is
still being maintained (despite the difficulty of doing so).

it is not "theoretical" that there are other OSes other than linux-based
ones, it is *real* that there are other OSes other than linux-based ones.

i trust therefore that this patch - now staged - is portable across
multiple POSIX compliant OSes.

-- 
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] Multiple applications and games need support for named pipe message mode (NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams)

https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

Jeff Muizelaar <jrmuizel(a)gmail.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |jrmuizel(a)gmail.com

-- 
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] Multiple applications and games need support for named pipe message mode (NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams)

https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

Robert Walker <bob.mt.wya(a)gmail.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |bob.mt.wya(a)gmail.com

-- 
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] Multiple applications and games need support for named pipe message mode (NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams)

https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

Jacek Caban <jacek(a)codeweavers.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |jacek(a)codeweavers.com

--- Comment #177 from Jacek Caban <jacek(a)codeweavers.com> ---
Since commit b682e1c41d89c9303d30312c83a402d0cdee4ece, we have support for
message more writes (NAMED_PIPE_MESSAGE_STREAM_WRITE). A patch for reads
(NAMED_PIPE_MESSAGE_STREAM_READ) is on its way:

https://source.winehq.org/patches/data/131854

-- 
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] Multiple applications and games need support for named pipe message mode (NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams)

https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #178 from Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <lkcl(a)lkcl.net> ---
(In reply to Jacek Caban from comment #177)
> Since commit b682e1c41d89c9303d30312c83a402d0cdee4ece, we have support for
> message more writes (NAMED_PIPE_MESSAGE_STREAM_WRITE). A patch for reads
> (NAMED_PIPE_MESSAGE_STREAM_READ) is on its way:
>
> https://source.winehq.org/patches/data/131854

hi jacek,

ok first question: i assume that both patches have had some form of
review and discussion?  if so, where is that taking place so that the
(increasingly large - 54 at the present time after 9 years) list of
people interested in seeing this be fixed can get involved, make
comments and so on?

second, from looking at the patch i have an immediate question: i assume
that you have some code outstanding: have you run the tests that are
attached to this bugreport in order to confirm that the known
race-conditions outlined in the majority of proposed implementations
are catered for?

specifically: when multiple threads are set up to read and multiple
threads are set up to write to the exact same pipe, the windows w32
API has "locking" around the length-data tuple which absolutely
guarantees that only one reader will have access to the actual pipe.
otherwise, what happens is: one reader reads a little bit from the
pipe thinking it's "data", and it happens to *INCLUDE* the length!

likewise when there are multiple writers, you get an overlap of
length1-length2-data1-data2 or worse length1-part-of-data1
length2-part-of-data2-part-of-data1-part-of-data2

can i suggest reading *carefully* (ignoring the various people who
keep thinking i'm being a fucking idiot), the whole of this bugreport
as it really is extremely complex.

basically the only solutions that will actually work in a cross-platform
way are: (1) shared memory (which has been ruled out in an extremely
rude way by julian but despite that i firmly agree with him: globally
shared memory can't be recovered / reopened if an app closes) or
(2) wineserver has to go multi-threaded in order to handle the
"blocking" semantics.  unfortunately, here *yet again* julian has
(in an extremely deeply unimpressively rude way) flat-out said "no"
with absolutely no explanation as to why.

and that's really all that you need to know about why this bug is now
eight years old, and despite being Priority 2 and is the cause of
several critical programs failing, still hasn't been fixed, because the
*actual* problem is nothing to do with programming or source code:
the *actual* problem is a systemic failure of wine's interaction with
"outsiders".  there was a report on slashdot well over 10 years ago about
this and it still hasn't really been resolved.

ah well.

anyway if you're brave enough to face up to that, then you'll do okay,
and i'll be honoured to help advise on a proposal that, in the many
years since this was raised, i believe may actually work in a
cross-platform way which might actually be acceptable (and, later,
could be adapted to improve wine and fix some of the  extremely
obscure performance bugs).

as always: feel free to ignore my input and advice if you so choose,
but bear in mind that in doing so you directly take all responsibility
for the consequences.  this is *very* low-level and great care has
to be taken to ensure that it really, really is technically correct.

also, you may be aware that once it *is* fixed, a whole slew of
other errors will crop up, not because this bug *isn't* implemented
correctly but because it *IS* implemented correctly.

if you implement it wrongly it is the worst of all possible worlds...
so be really *really* sure ok!

-- 
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] Multiple applications and games need support for named pipe message mode (NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams)

https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

winetest(a)luukku.com changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |winetest(a)luukku.com

--- Comment #179 from winetest(a)luukku.com ---
Well wine-staging has includded a series of patches related to this who knows
how long alredy. So it's actually fixed in staging, but the patches arent
merged in upstream. Can't say about the correctness of the patches. But I have
pretty much deep trust in Slackner's work.

-- 
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] Multiple applications and games need support for named pipe message mode (NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams)

https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #180 from Saulius K. <saulius2(a)gmail.com> ---
(In reply to winetest from comment #179)
> So it's actually fixed in staging, but the patches arent merged in upstream. > Can't say about the correctness of the patches. But I have pretty much deep 
> trust in Slackner's work.

Quick grep show that last patches from Sebastian, Michael and Adam were
commited only a year ago.  Jacek seems to be working on this since 2016-10:
https://source.winehq.org/git/wine.git/?a=search&st=commit&s=pipe%5B%5El%5D&...

And I see no Sign-offs or Froms mentioning Sebastian (and Co.:) here, so an
update on current situation / work being carried out would be very interesting
to get (from Sebastian, Jacek or esp. Alexandre).

(It was a while since I hanged on reading wine-devel@ daily – I miss these
times so much:)

-- 
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] Multiple applications and games need support for named pipe message mode (NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams)

https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #181 from Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <lkcl(a)lkcl.net> ---
(In reply to winetest from comment #179)
> Well wine-staging has includded a series of patches related to this who
> knows how long alredy. So it's actually fixed in staging,

ah.... from what i remember, the patches that adam wrote are based
 on a very special, unique and specific feature of the linux kernel's
 TCP/IP stack.
 in other words, they're completely non-portable.  meaning: FreeBSD
 and other OSes which did not have that specific feature.

 however... reviewing what he wrote very quickly i'm not seeing any
 evidence of the use of TCP/IP so that could have just been an idea
 that (fortunately!) wasn't used.
> but the patches
> arent merged in upstream. Can't say about the correctness of the patches.

from a quick scan i'm seeing that there's only been one extra test added,
 which does *not* include the absolutely critical multi-thread-reader
 and multi-thread-writer tests that i created which demonstrated the
 correctness of the (excruciatingly-slow-and-brain-dead) prototype patches
 many years ago.

 i cannot emphasise enough how important it is to double-check that the
 race conditions of multi-threaded readers, multi-threaded writers
 *and* multithreaded simultaneous readers-and-writers all pass.

 this really is an incredibly obscure and deceptively complex scenario
 which is why it's been left for such a long time.  i understood it
 well at the time but couldn't possibly describe it now without spending
 significant time on it.
> But I have pretty much deep trust in Slackner's work.

that's a very good sign.  i do have to say though that this particular
 scenario is about as complex as the threading library implementation
 that had to go into wine (which is identical to that of the freedce
 threading implementation which i'm also familiar with), and it has _that_
 much of a low-level impact, not least because it's part of the
 MSRPC infrastructure (NamedPipes *are* the means by which MSRPC
 communicates).

 so if you get this wrong you *can't even start up wine* which is as
 good a test as any... *but*... because wineserver is single-threaded
 it's very very deceptive (i.e. insufficient).  i recall suggesting
 adding (and using) a separate implementation of ncalrpc as a means
 to bypass this limitation, so that at least the WINREG and other
 critical infrastructure on which the tests rely can get up and
 running... but anyway.

 so, trust is great... but i would strongly suggest adding the required
 tests *before* proceeding further.  that gives an objective benchmark
 which everyone can double-check, very easily.

-- 
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] Multiple applications and games need support for named pipe message mode (NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams)

https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

nE0sIghT <update.microsoft(a)mail.ru> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|update.microsoft(a)mail.ru    |

-- 
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] Multiple applications and games need support for named pipe message mode (NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams)

https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #182 from Jacek Caban <jacek(a)codeweavers.com> ---
> And I see no Sign-offs or Froms mentioning Sebastian (and Co.:) here, so an
> update on current situation / work being carried out would be very
> interesting to get (from Sebastian, Jacek or esp. Alexandre).

Sure, here is an overview of the sutuation. If you're interested in patch
reviews, see wine-devel. All my commits to server (and some to ntdll) since
October were related.

I revisited what was already discussed in the bug: implement named pipes
entirely in wineserver. The implementation uses wineserver-based I/O
implemented by Alexandre in a generic way when he was implementing implementing
device-based I/O. What we have in the tree since last Friday is named pipe
implementation inside wineserver, where we can control everything, including
data flow and blocking. The committed series of patches contained all features
that previous Wine client-side implementation had, but I tried to move as much
as possible out of the series to limit the scope of a single very risky commit.
So app-visible fixes we have already are:

- zero length message reads
- peek bound to message size
- buffer handling and blocking identical to Windows
- proper behaviour on pipe end close

That should cover compatibility with applications that use
NAMED_PIPE_MESSAGE_STREAM_WRITE flag (without NAMED_PIPE_MESSAGE_STREAM_READ).
I believe that this bug is mostly about NAMED_PIPE_MESSAGE_STREAM_READ, which
is easy to fix now, but one more patch is still needed:
https://source.winehq.org/patches/data/131854

wine-staging has a different and nicely working message mode implementation.
The way it's implemented by Sebastian has its advantages. Most notably, its
performance is very good. Unfortunately, it has also a problem of being not
portable. That was actually my direct reason to revisit the bug: I needed
something working on macOS, so I couldn't use Sebastian's patches. The result
of my work is portable across all platforms that Wine supports. The interesting
thing is that both implementations don't really conflict with each other.
wine-staging implementation is mostly on client side and is very much like what
we still use for byte mode, so Sebastian may rebase it if he wishes.

-- 
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] Multiple applications and games need support for named pipe message mode (NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams)

https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #183 from Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <lkcl(a)lkcl.net> ---
something's been puzzling me for several hours, now.  i reviewed the
conversation so far, looking at what i wrote back in 2009, and the
very useful comments and input from juan as i first developed the
tests, then a first prototype, then extended the tests.

then adam came in, and we discussed the tests, and it's clear that
he fully understood the importance of the multi-read and multi-write
tests.

alexandre then butts in with some incredibly rude and dismissive
comments, and adam is then encouraged to *privately* talk with
alexandre, to "Get How It Should Be Implemented As Defined By
God Known as Alexandre".

now, what really puzzled me is: why did adam not implement the full
set of tests that he *knew* - from discussions with me - were critical
to demonstrating full correctness (where running the python 2.7
test suite with the multiprocess module was clearly not enough).

and it occurred to me that if he had done so, he would have had to
explain to alexandre why alexandre's over-ruling "I'M RIGHT LKCL
IS AN IDIOT DON'T LISTEN TO HIM LISTEN TO ME I'M THE LEADER OF
THIS PROJECT" dictats turned out to be wrong.

jacek, i hope that gives you some insight as to what you're up against.
you're up not only against an extremely technically-challenging core
strategic bottleneck where it's critical to get both high performance
*and* characteristics (reliable datagrams) that *do not exist* in
POSIX sockets (or they do but they're broken and highly non-portalbe),
but you're also dealing with a leader whose attitude towards impartial
(uncensored) criticism and constructive feedback that contradicts
his "Rule Of Law" is met with what can only best be described as
"spoiled brat childish behaviour".

that has, unfortunately, meant that both you and adam and sebastien
and myself have all had our time completely wasted, as well as
having the consequence that tens of thousands of wine users have been
let down... just so that alexandre can prove that he's "in charge".

i'll reply specifically to your message later, after i've read it a
couple more times.  i've also thought of another couple of tests, one
of which is to check if there is write-blocking (due to buffers
filling up).  if NT has write-blocking on message-mode named pipes,
any implementations that don't take that into account are going to
result in potentially critical behavioural-changes of applications.

-- 
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] Multiple applications and games need support for named pipe message mode (NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams)

https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #184 from Austin English <austinenglish(a)gmail.com> ---
(In reply to Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton from comment #178)
> ok first question: i assume that both patches have had some form of
> review and discussion?  if so, where is that taking place so that the
> (increasingly large - 54 at the present time after 9 years) list of
> people interested in seeing this be fixed can get involved, make
> comments and so on?

As with all patches, that discussion is on wine-patches and wine-devel, not
bugzilla.

(In reply to Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton from comment #183)
> jacek, i hope that gives you some insight as to what you're up against.
> you're up not only against an extremely technically-challenging core
> strategic bottleneck where it's critical to get both high performance
> *and* characteristics (reliable datagrams) that *do not exist* in
> POSIX sockets (or they do but they're broken and highly non-portalbe),
> but you're also dealing with a leader whose attitude towards impartial
> (uncensored) criticism and constructive feedback that contradicts
> his "Rule Of Law" is met with what can only best be described as
> "spoiled brat childish behaviour".

Bugzilla is for bugs, not for spreading your views or criticisms of the Wine
project. Take such things to your private blog or somewhere else.

-- 
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] Multiple applications and games need support for named pipe message mode (NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams)

https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #185 from Jacek Caban <jacek(a)codeweavers.com> ---
I agree with Austin. Luke, for the record, I found Alexandre's input very
valuable when I was working on this bug and I appreciate it. The fact that we
already have in the tree a working version of what you claimed to be impossible
without "multithreaded wineserver" is a prove that he was right on the
technical ground.

-- 
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] Multiple applications and games need support for named pipe message mode (NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams)

https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #186 from Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <lkcl(a)lkcl.net> ---
(In reply to Jacek Caban from comment #185)
> I agree with Austin. Luke, for the record, I found Alexandre's input very
> valuable when I was working on this bug and I appreciate it.

with austin's clarification of the rules (which he has only done
 for the first time in around 20 years) i am unable to respond, jacek,
 and also at the same time respect what austin has requested... which
 i am compelled to point out reluctantly (with apologies) that you've
 also broken.... which is the only reason why i am even able to include
 this paragraph here.  so let's drop the subject, as austin (at last)
 requests and clarifies.
> The fact that
> we already have in the tree a working version of what you claimed to be
> impossible without "multithreaded wineserver" is a prove that he was right
> on the technical ground.

jacek, first and most critical thing: have you run the tests that i
 developed back in 2009? specifically the ones in this attachment:
 https://bugs.winehq.org/attachment.cgi?id=19240&action=edit

 the tests go well beyond the original reason for the bugreport
 (python 2.7's multiprocessing module) - for last status see this
 https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195#c19

 as you can see, juan lang very kindly provided feedback all those
 years ago (which was very encouraging and also a lot of fun) and
 his expertise and knowledge proved invaluable to tell which were
 legitimate tests and which were tests that should be classed as
 legitimate but "programmer errors".

 importantly, the beginnings of a comprehensive test suite for
 message-mode was developed.

 since then i've thought of another test which really needs to be
 added: filling the buffers with writes that are deliberately
 not read for a long time.

 this is one that i hadn't thought of at the time
 which could potentially cause wineserver to block on write
 (or throw an error), leaving a message in an internal queue
 when it is the *client* that should have been blocked.

 ... that's if the design is such that messages are sent
 from the client-process to wineserver and from wineserver to
 the server-process...

 is there a design document which describes the details of
 the implementation, for review?

-- 
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] Multiple applications and games need support for named pipe message mode (NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams)

https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #187 from Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <lkcl(a)lkcl.net> ---
(In reply to Jacek Caban from comment #185)
> Bugzilla is for bugs, not for spreading your views or criticisms of the Wine
> project. Take such things to your private blog or somewhere else.

ah!  at last!  clarification of how wine operates! 
 why didn't you say so, 10, 15, 20 years ago?  why only now mention that,
 after all this time?

 (btw i don't have a private buhloggh austin: i'm a software libre developer
 and advocate, which means i operate entirely in the public arena).

-- 
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] Multiple applications and games need support for named pipe message mode (NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams)

https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

--- Comment #188 from Austin English <austinenglish(a)gmail.com> ---
(In reply to Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton from comment #187)
> (In reply to Jacek Caban from comment #185)
> > Bugzilla is for bugs, not for spreading your views or criticisms of the Wine
> > project. Take such things to your private blog or somewhere else.
>
> ah!  at last!  clarification of how wine operates! 
>  why didn't you say so, 10, 15, 20 years ago?  why only now mention that,
>  after all this time?

It's not the first time, by any means. I've mentioned it on plenty of other
bugs. Just because you only read certain ones doesn't mean I haven't said this
before.
> (btw i don't have a private buhloggh austin: i'm a software libre developer
>  and advocate, which means i operate entirely in the public arena).

Private would just mean run by yourself, blogs are obviously intended for
public consumption. Plenty of open source developers develop in the open, and
blog on their own blogs. You're entitled to whatever opinion of Wine, myself,
and AJ that you want, but bugzilla is not the place for it.

I don't intend to comment here further. I don't want to sound like I'm cutting
off criticism, but if this bug keeps going as a personal comment section, I can
and will revoke bugzilla access. It's gone on long enough, and does not
contribute to this bug being fixed. Again, if you have technical comments, use
wine-devel.

-- 
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] Multiple applications and games need support for named pipe message mode (NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams)

https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

Jacek Caban <jacek(a)codeweavers.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Fixed by SHA1|                            |aa472f5eb50009c7f7e31526918
                   |                            |119ed3f202de0
             Status|STAGED                      |RESOLVED
         Resolution|---                         |FIXED

--- Comment #189 from Jacek Caban <jacek(a)codeweavers.com> ---
The fix is in Git now. Please test affected applications and file new,
separated bug reports if there are more problems.

-- 
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] Multiple applications and games need support for named pipe message mode (NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams)

https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

Alexandre Julliard <julliard(a)winehq.org> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|RESOLVED                    |CLOSED

--- Comment #190 from Alexandre Julliard <julliard(a)winehq.org> ---
Closing bugs fixed in 2.5.

-- 
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] Multiple applications and games need support for named pipe message mode (NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams)

[WineHQ Bugzilla]

https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

Anastasius Focht <focht(a)gmx.net> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 OS|other                       |Linux
          Component|-unknown                    |wineserver
           Hardware|Other                       |x86

-- 
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.

[Bug 17195] Multiple applications and games need support for named pipe message mode (NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams)

[WineHQ Bugzilla]

https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17195

Ribbon <ribbon_45(a)proton.me> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |ribbon_45(a)proton.me

--- Comment #191 from Ribbon <ribbon_45(a)proton.me> ---
This feature regressed after some releases and Resident Evil 5 stopped to work.

I tested on the 9.0, 9.10, 8.0, 7.0 and 6.0 versions.

-- 
Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the
above URL to reply.
You are receiving this mail because:
You are watching all bug changes.