Hi Chun, I've had a bit more time to look into this and I think I've got a better idea of what's going on.
Firstly, I had a really obvious typo above (doh!) which caused the error I
saw in socket-send (2, above). Putting in the count parameter and the
socket-send succeeds, as expected.
Replacing the handler-case with handler-bind and dropping into the
debugger, I identified where the strange error I was seeing with
socket-receive comes from (4, above). It seems the recvfrom is returning an
error code of 10035, (WSAEWOULDBLOCK), which you are signalling with a
condition. But the ns-try-again-condition only has a :HOST-OR-IP initarg,
not a :SOCKET initarg. So I commented out that bit of code and the
condition is signalled ok (although I'm not handling it, but that's fine).
So my test function is
(defun usocket-test ()
(let ((s (usocket:socket-connect nil nil
:protocol :datagram
:element-type '(unsigned-byte 8)
:local-port 8001)))
(unwind-protect
(do ((i 0 (1+ i))
(buffer (make-array 1024 :element-type '(unsigned-byte 8)
:initial-element 0))
(now (get-universal-time))
(done nil))
((or done (= i 4))
nil)
(format t "~Ds ~D Waiting state ~S~%" (- (get-universal-time)
now) i (usocket::state s))
(when (usocket:wait-for-input s :ready-only t :timeout 5)
(format t "~D state ~S~%" i (usocket::state s))
(handler-bind
((error (lambda (c)
(format t "socket-receive error: ~A~%" c)
(break)
nil)))
(multiple-value-bind (buffer count remote-host remote-port)
(usocket:socket-receive s buffer 1024)
(handler-bind
((error (lambda (c)
(format t "socket-send error: ~A~%" c)
(break))))
(when buffer
(usocket:socket-send s (subseq buffer 0 count) count
:host remote-host
:port remote-port)))))))
(usocket:socket-close s))))
My output is now:
0s 0 Waiting state NIL
0 state :READ
2s 1 Waiting state :READ
1 state :READ
2s 2 Waiting state :READ
2 state :READ
2s 3 Waiting state :READ
3 state :READ
NIL
We are getting closer. The read state is still staying in :READ even after
a successful socket-receive call, so the loop is still spinning. I can fix
this easily by passing in the socket instance directly to the
receive-message function and manually setting the %ready-p flag to nil.
This gives me the correct behaviour:
0s 0 Waiting state NIL
0 state :READ
4s 1 Waiting state :READ
9s 2 Waiting state NIL
14s 3 Waiting state NIL
NIL
I've attached a diff of backend/lispworks.lisp showing what I describe
above, feel free to use/ignore it.
Frank.
On 24 May 2015 at 20:57, Frank James <frank.a.ja...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Chun,
>
> Thanks for looking into this. I've just pulled the most recent codes from
> github and have had a little play with them. I now get an error signalled
> on the socket-receive when I expect an error (rather than a simple -1 count
> as before). This is good.
>
> However, I am still seeing the socket-state behaviour I described before,
> along with a new bug that has probably been introduced by the recent
> changes.
>
> Consider the following simple function which listens for UDP port 8001 for
> up to 4 iterations:
>
> (defun usocket-test ()
> (let ((s (usocket:socket-connect nil nil
> :protocol :datagram
> :element-type '(unsigned-byte 8)
> :local-port 8001)))
> (unwind-protect
> (do ((i 0 (1+ i))
> (buffer (make-array 1024 :element-type '(unsigned-byte 8)
> :initial-element 0))
> (done nil))
> ((or done (= i 4))
> nil)
> (when (usocket:wait-for-input s :ready-only t :timeout 10)
> (format t "~D state ~S~%" i (usocket::state s))
> (handler-case
> (multiple-value-bind (buffer count remote-host remote-port)
>
> (usocket:socket-receive s buffer 1024)
> (handler-case
> (usocket:socket-send s (subseq buffer 0 count)
> :host remote-host
> :port remote-port)
> (error (c)
> (format t "socket-send error: ~A~%" c))))
> (error (c)
> (format t "socket-receive error: ~A~%" c)))))
> (usocket:socket-close s))))
>
>
> after calling this from your repl, from another process send a UDP packet
> to port 8001 to get things going. I get the following output:
>
> 0 state :READ
> socket-send error: #<STANDARD-GENERIC-FUNCTION USOCKET:SOCKET-SEND
> 21CADCFA> is called with unpaired keyword in (2130706433 :PORT 58279).
> 1 state :READ
> socket-receive error: MAKE-INSTANCE is called with keyword :SOCKET among
> the arguments (USOCKET:NS-TRY-AGAIN-CONDITION :SOCKET 2604) which is not
> one of (:HOST-OR-IP).
> 2 state :READ
> socket-receive error: MAKE-INSTANCE is called with keyword :SOCKET among
> the arguments (USOCKET:NS-TRY-AGAIN-CONDITION :SOCKET 2604) which is not
> one of (:HOST-OR-IP).
> 3 state :READ
> socket-receive error: MAKE-INSTANCE is called with keyword :SOCKET among
> the arguments (USOCKET:NS-TRY-AGAIN-CONDITION :SOCKET 2604) which is not
> one of (:HOST-OR-IP).
> NIL
>
> My observations:
> 1. The initial socket-receive succeeds (as expected).
> 2. The initial socket-send fails with an error I've not seen before and
> can't diagnose...
> 3. Subsequent calls to wait-for-input return immediately because the
> socket is still in a :READ state, even though I already successfully called
> socket-receive in the first iteration.
> 4. Subsequent calls to socket-receive now fail with a different error I
> can't diagnose.
>
> If I didn't have the max iteration cap, this would spin using 100% of a
> CPU core and adding around 2MB to the heap per second (on my machine),
> maxing out the 1GB personal edition heap limit in a short space of time. So
> I think it's a pretty serious issue. I mainly use SBCL, I use LispWorks
> occasionally to make sure my codes work on at least 1 other implementation,
> so I'm not exactly a LispWorks expert.
>
> If you want any more explanations, clarifications or examples I'll be
> happy to do my best to help.
>
> As before, I'm using LispWorks personal edition 6.1.1 on Windows 8.1.
>
> Frank.
>
>
>
> On 22 May 2015 at 09:24, Chun Tian (binghe) <binghe.l...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Frank,
>>
>> Today I have modified SOCKET-SEND and SOCKET-RECEIVE for LispWorks, to be
>> able to detect and report socket errors. I think in this way, these APIs
>> on LispWorks could behavior closer to other platforms.
>>
>> Now on Windows, your test code should return a
>> USOCKET:CONNECTION-RESET-ERROR condition, which equals to WSA error
>> ECONNRESET. However, when I test the same code on Mac OS X, it instead
>> returns USOCKET:CONNECTION-REFUSED-ERROR, I think this is a behavior of BSD
>> sockets.
>>
>> I hope you can try latest usocket code from Git [1], to see if it works
>> better for your case now. My code changes commit can be seen here [2].
>>
>> For wait-for-input, I can’t see what you see (the socket object remains
>> in a :READ state), if you still think this is an issue, I hope you can
>> create another test code to demonstrate this issue.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Chun
>>
>> [1] https://github.com/usocket/usocket
>> [2]
>> https://github.com/usocket/usocket/commit/13386639889fa812540fc4f77824c47e7616db37
>>
>> Il giorno 10/apr/2015, alle ore 23:00, Frank James <
>> frank.a.ja...@gmail.com> ha scritto:
>>
>> > I've been testing some UDP codes on Lispworks (personal 32bit Windows
>> version) and have encountered some undocumented behaviour, I think it's a
>> matter of opinion whether it's a bug or not but it should probably have a
>> sentence or two documenting it somewhere.
>> >
>> > Basically I'm sending a UDP packet to a host and listening for a reply,
>> using socket-send and socket-receive. If the host in question is not
>> listening for UDP traffic on that particular port, the Windows socket API
>> says it should return an ECONNRESET error immediately on the socket-receive
>> call, this is indicated by a -1 return value from the underlying recvfrom
>> call.
>> >
>> > When this happens the Lispworks backend code returns a length of -1
>> (and buffer nil). This is perfectly acceptable behaviour I think (although
>> it'd be somewhat nicer to signal an error, but that's a matter of taste).
>> But it should be documented that checking the length here is the correct
>> way to detect an error occurred.
>> >
>> > Example code would be something like:
>> >
>> > (let ((sock (usocket:socket-connect "localhost" 1234 :protocol
>> :datagram :element-type '(unsigned-byte 8))))
>> > (unwind-protect
>> > (progn
>> > (usocket:socket-send sock (make-array 16 :element-type
>> '(unsigned-byte 8) :initial-element 0) 16)
>> > (let ((buffer (make-array 16 :element-type '(unsigned-byte 8)
>> :initial-element 0)))
>> > (usocket:socket-receive sock buffer 16)))
>> > (usocket:socket-close sock)))
>> >
>> >
>> > What is somewhat more annoying is that the socket object remains in a
>> :READ state. This means that a polling loop using wait-for-input spins
>> continuously, with each socket-receive returning -1 (as explained above).
>> Probably the socket state should be cleared if a socket-receive fails.
>> >
>> > Apologies if this is all well-known to those reading this list, but it
>> caused me 10 minutes of head scratching earlier today and thought it was
>> worth mentioning.
>> >
>> > Frank.
>> >
>>
>>
>
diff.lisp
Description: Binary data
