How can I clear UDP buffer without recvfrom? - c

I have an embedded linux project. And it gets data via UDP to static char array from UDP buffer. This static array's size is 20000 bytes. I want to ignore UDB messages that exceed this size. But when comes bigger data, it stays always in UDP buffer since it is not read with recvfrom. Is there any way to clear this bigger data in UDP buffer?

One cannot discard the data from the socket buffer without reading. But one can read these large datagrams even when having a smaller buffer - it will simply discard anything which does not fit into the given buffer. To find out if the datagram was too large use the MSG_TRUNC flag so that it will provide the original length of the packet. If this indicates an oversized packet just discard it and continue with the next packet.

Related

Querying remaining socket send buffer size in C?

I am trying to solve the problem of being able to read from one socket and then write to another socket without blocking and without buffering for cases where I cannot use splice().
As a first pass solution what I have in mind is to query the remaining size of the send buffer on the write socket, read that much from the reading socket, then write that much to the write socket knowing we can't block.
I have found someone claim at https://stackoverflow.com/a/9982492/4598583 that to query the remaining buffer size you can do the following:
getsockopt(sockfd, SOL_SOCKET, SO_SNDBUF, &send_buf, &optlen);
However, I cannot find a reference to whether SO_SNDBUF will return the maximum buffer size or the remaining buffer size.
Can anyone confirm if querying the remaining (not maximum) buffer size is possible?
Alternatively, when a write socket indicates that that socket is writable (via poll() or some other mechanism) is there a minimum size of data defined anywhere that you can write without blocking or truncation in this case?
SO_SNDBUF don't give you the remaining size of send buffer, but the maximum size of it. This should be the max buffer that the OS can send each time, or max send witout blocking. So it should fit anyway your need.
From Linux Manual:
SO_SNDBUF
Sets or gets the maximum socket send buffer in bytes. The
kernel doubles this value (to allow space for bookkeeping
overhead) when it is set using setsockopt(2), and this doubled
value is returned by getsockopt(2). The default value is set
by the /proc/sys/net/core/wmem_default file and the maximum
allowed value is set by the /proc/sys/net/core/wmem_max file.
The minimum (doubled) value for this option is 2048.

Is data successfully transferred in UDP even though the buffer sizes are different?

Or do they have to be equal in order for the data to be sent perfectly at all times?
I am new to socket programming. I wrote a set of codes to send data from one host to another, with the same buffer size for each. And I decreased the receiver's buffer size, then only ascii files are sent properly, not binary ones.
Is the data in the rear cut out if the receiver's buf size if smaller?
From the recv(3) documentation:
For message-based sockets, such as SOCK_RAW, SOCK_DGRAM, and
SOCK_SEQPACKET, the entire message shall be read in a single
operation. If a message is too long to fit in the supplied buffer, and
MSG_PEEK is not set in the flags argument, the excess bytes shall be
discarded.
Emphasis added.
The data will be received fine as long as the receiver's buffer is large enough to contain the datagram. If the receiver's buffer is too small, the excess will be discarded.
If you need to know how big the buffer should be, you can call recv first with the MSG_PEEK flag. The return value will be the size of the full datagram. You can then allocate a big enough buffer, and call it again without this option to receive the packet and remove it from the queue.

Isn't recv() in C socket programming blocking?

In Receiver, I have
recvfd=accept(sockfd,&other_side,&len);
while(1)
{
recv(recvfd,buf,MAX_BYTES-1,0);
buf[MAX_BYTES]='\0';
printf("\n Number %d contents :%s\n",counter,buf);
counter++;
}
In Sender , I have
send(sockfd,mesg,(size_t)length,0);
send(sockfd,mesg,(size_t)length,0);
send(sockfd,mesg,(size_t)length,0);
MAX_BYTES is 1024 and length of mesg is 15. Currently, It calls recv only one time. I want recv function to be called three times for each corresponding send. How do I achieve it?
In short: yes, it is blocking. But not in the way you think.
recv() blocks until any data is readable. But you don't know the size in advance.
In your scenario, you could do the following:
call select() and put the socket where you want to read from into the READ FD set
when select() returns with a positive number, your socket has data ready to be read
then, check if you could receive length bytes from the socket:
recv(recvfd, buf, MAX_BYTES-1, MSG_PEEK), see man recv(2) for the MSG_PEEK param or look at MSDN, they have it as well
now you know how much data is available
if there's less than length available, return and do nothing
if there's at least length available, read length and return (if there's more than length available, we'll continue with step 2 since a new READ event will be signalled by select()
To send discrete messages over a byte stream protocol, you have to encode messages into some kind of framing language. The network can chop up the protocol into arbitrarily sized packets, and so the receives do not correlate with your messages in any way. The receiver has to implement a state machine which recognizes frames.
A simple framing protocol is to have some length field (say two octets: 16 bits, for a maximum frame length of 65535 bytes). The length field is followed by exactly that many bytes.
You must not even assume that the length field itself is received all at once. You might ask for two bytes, but recv could return just one. This won't happen for the very first message received from the socket, because network (or local IPC pipe, for that matter) segments are never just one byte long. But somewhere in the middle of the stream, it is possible that the fist byte of the 16 bit length field could land on the last position of one network frame.
An easy way to deal with this is to use a buffered I/O library instead of raw operating system file handles. In a POSIX environment, you can take an open socket handle, and use the fdopen function to associate it with a FILE * stream. Then you can use functions like getc and fread to simplify the input handling (somewhat).
If in-band framing is not acceptable, then you have to use a protocol which supports framing, namely datagram type sockets. The main disadvantage of this is that the principal datagram-based protocol used over IP is UDP, and UDP is unreliable. This brings in a lot of complexity in your application to deal with out of order and missing frames. The size of the frames is also restricted by the maximum IP datagram size which is about 64 kilobytes, including all the protocol headers.
Large UDP datagrams get fragmented, which, if there is unreliability in the network, adds up to greater unreliability: if any IP fragment is lost, the entire packet is lost. All of it must be retransmitted; there is no way to just get a repetition of the fragment that was lost. The TCP protocol performs "path MTU discovery" to adjust its segment size so that IP fragmentation is avoided, and TCP has selective retransmission to recover missing segments.
I bet you've created a TCP socket using SOCK_STREAM, which would cause the three messages to be read into your buffer during the first recv call. If you want to read the messages one-by-one, create a UPD socket using SOCK_DGRAM, or develop some type of message format which allows you to parse your messages when they arrive in a stream (assuming your messages will not always be fixed length).
First send the length to be received in a fixed format regarding the size of length in bytes you use to transmit this length, then make recv() loop until length bytes had been received.
Note the fact (as also already mentioned by other answers), that the size and number of chunks received do not necessarly need to be the same as sent. Only the sum of all bytes received shall be the same as the sum of all bytes sent.
Read the man pages for recvand send. Especially read the sections on what those functions RETURN.
recv will block until the entire buffer is filled, or the socket is closed.
If you want to read length bytes and return, then you must only pass to recv a buffer of size length.
You can use select to determine if
there are any bytes waiting to be read,
how many bytes are waiting to be read, then
read only those bytes
This can avoid recv from blocking.
Edit:
After re-reading the docs, the following may be true: your three "messages" may be being read all-at-once since length + length + length < MAX_BYTES - 1.
Another possibility, if recv is never returning, is that you may need to flush your socket from the sender-side. The data may be waiting in a buffer to actually be sent to the receiver.

how to send UDP datagram larger than system buffer?

can any body here tell me how to send datagram larger than system buffer supplied to UDP socket in order to test the MSG_TRANC in C
and how i can get the size of the socket buffer ?
You could always increase the buffer size with the setsockopt function using the SO_SNDBUF flag.
Otherwise send (or sendto) will normally block.
However, I would recommend you to try and rework your protocol so the packets fit inside the send buffer. You can always reassemble the packages when received (if you have proper sequencing of them).
What do you mean or want to to do?
I hope you read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_Datagram_Protocol
Are you attempting to send a datagram with total length greater than single packet size? Or is your send buffer used in building a packet too small?

How large should my recv buffer be when calling recv in the socket library

I have a few questions about the socket library in C. Here is a snippet of code I'll refer to in my questions.
char recv_buffer[3000];
recv(socket, recv_buffer, 3000, 0);
How do I decide how big to make recv_buffer? I'm using 3000, but it's arbitrary.
what happens if recv() receives a packet bigger than my buffer?
how can I know if I have received the entire message without calling recv again and have it wait forever when there is nothing to be received?
is there a way I can make a buffer not have a fixed amount of space, so that I can keep adding to it without fear of running out of space? maybe using strcat to concatenate the latest recv() response to the buffer?
I know it's a lot of questions in one, but I would greatly appreciate any responses.
The answers to these questions vary depending on whether you are using a stream socket (SOCK_STREAM) or a datagram socket (SOCK_DGRAM) - within TCP/IP, the former corresponds to TCP and the latter to UDP.
How do you know how big to make the buffer passed to recv()?
SOCK_STREAM: It doesn't really matter too much. If your protocol is a transactional / interactive one just pick a size that can hold the largest individual message / command you would reasonably expect (3000 is likely fine). If your protocol is transferring bulk data, then larger buffers can be more efficient - a good rule of thumb is around the same as the kernel receive buffer size of the socket (often something around 256kB).
SOCK_DGRAM: Use a buffer large enough to hold the biggest packet that your application-level protocol ever sends. If you're using UDP, then in general your application-level protocol shouldn't be sending packets larger than about 1400 bytes, because they'll certainly need to be fragmented and reassembled.
What happens if recv gets a packet larger than the buffer?
SOCK_STREAM: The question doesn't really make sense as put, because stream sockets don't have a concept of packets - they're just a continuous stream of bytes. If there's more bytes available to read than your buffer has room for, then they'll be queued by the OS and available for your next call to recv.
SOCK_DGRAM: The excess bytes are discarded.
How can I know if I have received the entire message?
SOCK_STREAM: You need to build some way of determining the end-of-message into your application-level protocol. Commonly this is either a length prefix (starting each message with the length of the message) or an end-of-message delimiter (which might just be a newline in a text-based protocol, for example). A third, lesser-used, option is to mandate a fixed size for each message. Combinations of these options are also possible - for example, a fixed-size header that includes a length value.
SOCK_DGRAM: An single recv call always returns a single datagram.
Is there a way I can make a buffer not have a fixed amount of space, so that I can keep adding to it without fear of running out of space?
No. However, you can try to resize the buffer using realloc() (if it was originally allocated with malloc() or calloc(), that is).
For streaming protocols such as TCP, you can pretty much set your buffer to any size. That said, common values that are powers of 2 such as 4096 or 8192 are recommended.
If there is more data then what your buffer, it will simply be saved in the kernel for your next call to recv.
Yes, you can keep growing your buffer. You can do a recv into the middle of the buffer starting at offset idx, you would do:
recv(socket, recv_buffer + idx, recv_buffer_size - idx, 0);
If you have a SOCK_STREAM socket, recv just gets "up to the first 3000 bytes" from the stream. There is no clear guidance on how big to make the buffer: the only time you know how big a stream is, is when it's all done;-).
If you have a SOCK_DGRAM socket, and the datagram is larger than the buffer, recv fills the buffer with the first part of the datagram, returns -1, and sets errno to EMSGSIZE. Unfortunately, if the protocol is UDP, this means the rest of the datagram is lost -- part of why UDP is called an unreliable protocol (I know that there are reliable datagram protocols but they aren't very popular -- I couldn't name one in the TCP/IP family, despite knowing the latter pretty well;-).
To grow a buffer dynamically, allocate it initially with malloc and use realloc as needed. But that won't help you with recv from a UDP source, alas.
For SOCK_STREAM socket, the buffer size does not really matter, because you are just pulling some of the waiting bytes and you can retrieve more in a next call. Just pick whatever buffer size you can afford.
For SOCK_DGRAM socket, you will get the fitting part of the waiting message and the rest will be discarded. You can get the waiting datagram size with the following ioctl:
#include <sys/ioctl.h>
int size;
ioctl(sockfd, FIONREAD, &size);
Alternatively you can use MSG_PEEK and MSG_TRUNC flags of the recv() call to obtain the waiting datagram size.
ssize_t size = recv(sockfd, buf, len, MSG_PEEK | MSG_TRUNC);
You need MSG_PEEK to peek (not receive) the waiting message - recv returns the real, not truncated size; and you need MSG_TRUNC to not overflow your current buffer.
Then you can just malloc(size) the real buffer and recv() datagram.
There is no absolute answer to your question, because technology is always bound to be implementation-specific. I am assuming you are communicating in UDP because incoming buffer size does not bring problem to TCP communication.
According to RFC 768, the packet size (header-inclusive) for UDP can range from 8 to 65 515 bytes. So the fail-proof size for incoming buffer is 65 507 bytes (~64KB)
However, not all large packets can be properly routed by network devices, refer to existing discussion for more information:
What is the optimal size of a UDP packet for maximum throughput?
What is the largest Safe UDP Packet Size on the Internet
16kb is about right; if you're using gigabit ethernet, each packet could be 9kb in size.

Resources