[Bug 17195] Multiple applications and games need support for named pipe message mode (NamedPipe datagrams need to be _really_ datagrams)

[wine-bugs at winehq.org]

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

--- Comment #186 from Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton <lkcl at 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.