Recently I use dbus as IPC, but I encounter some problems:
how to process send message failed: The dbus_connection_send can send a dbus message, But the document say:
Because this only queues the message, the only reason it can fail is
lack of memory. Even if the connection is disconnected, no error will
be returned. If the function fails due to lack of memory, it returns
FALSE. The function will never fail for other reasons; even if the
connection is disconnected, you can queue an outgoing message, though
obviously it won't be sent.
so how to process this case when connection disconnect to ensure all the message in outgoing queue be sent successfully
how to process connection disconnected when receive message by dbus_connection_dispatch, my code like this, But I think it will lose some message when reconnect to dbus
void DbusMessageWrapper::messageDispatchThreadFunction()
{
start:
struct pollfd *pollFd = &m_pollFd;
if (!dbus_connection_set_watch_functions(m_dbusConnection, addWatch, removeWatch, NULL, this, NULL))
{
TONLY_ERROR("dbus_connection_set_watch_functions failed");
return;
}
if (!dbus_connection_add_filter(m_dbusConnection, messageProcessFunction, this, NULL))
{
TONLY_INFO("dbus_connection_add_filter failed");
return;
}
int iret = 0;
for (; !m_isShuttingDown;)
{
iret = poll(pollFd, 1, -1);
if (iret < 0)
{
///If poll return -1, we think that poll does not work on current plateform, so emit a ALERT log and exit application
TONLY_ALERT("poll for dbus fd failed, the application will exit.");
exit(1);
}
/**
* If poll return POLLHUP/POLLRDHUP/POLLERR event, we think the dbus connection have disconnected from dbus deamon
* we should release the request name and close current dbus connection, then reconnect to the dbus deamon,
* aslo add the message observer watch to dbus connection again
*/
if ((pollFd->revents & POLLHUP) || (pollFd->revents & POLLRDHUP) || (pollFd->revents & POLLERR))
{
TONLY_ERROR("poll error event occured, will reconnect to dbus deamon.");
dbusDisConnect();
dbusConnect();
///reinstall the message observer
auto observers = m_observers;
m_observers.clear();
for (auto it = observers.begin(); it != observers.end(); it++)
{
addMessageObserver({it->second});
}
goto start;
}
unsigned int flags = 0;
if (pollFd->revents & POLLIN)
{
flags |= DBUS_WATCH_READABLE;
}
///wait for there are enougth memory
while (!dbus_watch_handle(m_watch, flags))
{
TONLY_ERROR("Dbus need more memory");
sleep(1);
}
while (dbus_connection_get_dispatch_status(m_dbusConnection) == DBUS_DISPATCH_DATA_REMAINS)
{
dbus_connection_dispatch(m_dbusConnection);
}
}
}
It is highly recommended that you use a D-Bus library other than libdbus, as libdbus is fiddly to use correctly, as you are finding. If possible, use GDBus or QtDBus instead, as they are much higher-level bindings which are easier to use. If you need a lower-level binding, sd-bus is more modern than libdbus.
Both higher-level D-Bus libraries handle message transmission failure and disconnection differently from libdbus. Since it’s not entirely clear exactly what problems you’re having, I suggest you read their documentation and see if they meet your use case.
Related
I am writing a little web server which involves epoll and multithread. For small and short http/1.1 requests and responses, it works as expected. But when working with large size file downloads, it is always interrupted by the timer I devised. I expire the timers with a fixed timeout value, but I also have a if statement to check if the response was sent successfully.
static void
_expire_timers(list_t *timers, long timeout)
{
httpconn_t *conn;
int sockfd;
node_t *timer;
long cur_time;
long stamp;
timer = list_first(timers);
if (timer) {
cur_time = mstime();
do {
stamp = list_node_stamp(timer);
conn = (httpconn_t *)list_node_data(timer);
if ((cur_time - stamp >= timeout) && httpconn_close(conn)) {
sockfd = httpconn_sockfd(conn);
DEBSI("[CONN] socket closed, server disconnected", sockfd);
close(sockfd);
list_del(timers, stamp);
}
timer = list_next(timers);
} while (timer);
}
}
I realized that in a non-blocking environment, the write() function might be interrupted during the request-response communication. I wonder how long write() can hold or how much data write() can send, so I can tweek the timout setting in my code.
This is the code which involves write(),
void
http_rep_get(int clifd, void *cache, char *path, void *req)
{
httpmsg_t *rep;
int len_msg;
char *bytes;
rep = _get_rep_msg((list_t *)cache, path, req);
bytes = msg_create_rep(rep, &len_msg);
/* send msg */
DEBSI("[REP] Sending reply msg...", clifd);
write(clifd, bytes, len_msg);
/* send body */
DEBSI("[REP] Sending body...", clifd);
write(clifd, msg_body_start(rep), msg_body_len(rep));
free(bytes);
msg_destroy(rep, 0);
}
And the following is the epoll loop I use to process the incoming requests,
do {
nevents = epoll_wait(epfd, events, MAXEVENTS, HTTP_KEEPALIVE_TIME);
if (nevents == -1) perror("epoll_wait()");
/* expire the timers */
_expire_timers(timers, HTTP_KEEPALIVE_TIME);
/* loop through events */
for (i = 0; i < nevents; i++) {
conn = (httpconn_t *)events[i].data.ptr;
sockfd = httpconn_sockfd(conn);
/* error case */
if ((events[i].events & EPOLLERR) || (events[i].events & EPOLLHUP) ||
(!(events[i].events & EPOLLIN))) {
perror("EPOLL ERR|HUP");
list_update(timers, conn, mstime());
break;
}
else if (sockfd == srvfd) {
_receive_conn(srvfd, epfd, cache, timers);
}
else {
/* client socket; read client data and process it */
thpool_add_task(taskpool, httpconn_task, conn);
}
}
} while (svc_running);
The http_rep_get() is executed by the threadpool handler httpconn_task(), HTTP_KEEPALIVE_TIME is the fixed timeout. The handler httpconn_task() will add a timer to the timers once a request arrives. Since the write() is executed in http_rep_get(), I think it might be interrupted by the timers. I guess I can change the way to write to the clients, but I need to make sure how much the write() can do.
If you are interested, you may browser my project to help me with this.
https://github.com/grassroot72/Maestro
Cheers,
Edward
Is there a size limit of write() for a socket fd?
It depends on what you mean by a limit.
As the comments explain, a write call may write fewer bytes than you ask it to. Furthermore, this is expected behavior if you perform a large write to a socket. However, there is no reliable way to determine (or predict) how many bytes will be written before you call write.
The correct way to deal with this is to check how many bytes were actually written each time, and use a loop for ensure that all bytes are written (or until you get a failure).
Before I Start
Please don't mark this question as a duplicate. I have already seen the numerous posts on SO about handling multiple clients with socket programming. Most people recommend just multi-threading, but I am trying to avoid that path because I have read it has a few problems:
Bad Scalability
Large Overhead/Inefficient/Memory Hungry
Difficult to Debug
Any posts that I have read that specifically talk about using a single thread either have bad/no answers or have unclear explanations, like people saying "Just use select()!"
The Problem
I am writing code for a server to handle multiple (~1000) clients, and I'm having trouble figuring out how to create an efficient solution. Right now I already have the code for my server that is able to handle 1 client at a time. Both are written in C; the server is on Windows using WinSock and the client is on Linux.
The server and client send several communications back and forth, using send() and blocking recv() calls. Writing this code was pretty simple, and I won't post it here because it is pretty long and I doubt anyone will actually read through all of it. Also the exact implementation is not important, I just want to talk about high level pseudocode. The real difficulty is changing the server to handle multiple clients.
What's Already Out There
I have found a nice PDF tutorial about how to create a WinSock server that handles multiple clients and it can be found here: WinSock Multiple Client Support. It's in C++ but it's easily transferable to C.
From what I understand the server operates something like this:
while (running) {
Sleep(1000);
/* Accept all incoming clients and add to clientArray. */
for (client in clientArray) {
/* Interact with client */
if (recv(...) == "disconnect") {
/* Disconnect from client */
}
}
}
/* Close all connections. */
The problem that I see with using this approach is that you essentially only handle one client at a time (which is obvious because you aren't multithreading), but what if the interaction with each client only needs to happen once? Meaning, what if I just want to send some data back and forth and close the connection? This operation could take anywhere from 5 seconds to 5 minutes depending on the speed of the clients connection, so other clients would be blocking on a connect() call to the server while the server handles a client for 5 minutes. It doesn't seem very efficient, but maybe the best way would be to implement a waiting queue, where clients are connected and told to wait for a while? I'm not sure, but it makes me curious about how large servers send out update downloads concurrently to thousands of clients, and if I should operate the same way.
Also, is there a reason for adding a Sleep(1000) call in the main server loop, if the send() and recv() between the server and client take a while (~1 minute)?
What I'm Asking For
What I want is a solution to handling multiple clients on a single threaded server that is efficient enough for ~1000 clients. If you tell me that the solution in the PDF is fine, that's good enough for me (maybe I'm just too preoccupied with efficiency.)
Please give answers that include a verbal explanation of the implementation, server/client pseudocode, or even a small sample code for the server, if you're feeling sadistic.)
Thanks in advance.
I have written single thread socket pool handling. Im using non-blocking sockets and select call to handle all send, receive and errors.
My class keep all sockets in array, and build 3 fd set's for select call. When something happens it check read or write or error list and handle those events.
For example, non-blocking client socket during connection can trigger write or error event. If error event happens then connection failed. If write happens, connection is established.
All sockets is in read fd set. If you create server socket (with bind and listen) new connection will trigger read event. Then check if socket is server socket then call accept for new connection. If read operation is triggered by regular socket then there is some bytes to read.. just call recv with buffer arge enough to suck all data from that socket.
SOCKET maxset=0;
fd_set rset, wset, eset;
FD_ZERO(&rset);
FD_ZERO(&wset);
FD_ZERO(&eset);
for (size_t i=0; i<readsockets.size(); i++)
{
SOCKET s = readsockets[i]->s->GetSocket();
FD_SET(s, &rset);
if (s > maxset) maxset = s;
}
for (size_t i=0; i<writesockets.size(); i++)
{
SOCKET s = writesockets[i]->s->GetSocket();
FD_SET(s, &wset);
if (s > maxset) maxset = s;
}
for (size_t i=0; i<errorsockets.size(); i++)
{
SOCKET s = errorsockets[i]->s->GetSocket();
FD_SET(s, &eset);
if (s > maxset) maxset = s;
}
int ret = 0;
if (bBlocking)
ret = select(maxset + 1, &rset, &wset, &eset, NULL/*&tv*/);
else
{
timeval tv= {0, timeout*1000};
ret = select(maxset + 1, &rset, &wset, &eset, &tv);
}
if (ret < 0)
{
//int err = errno;
NetworkCheckError();
return false;
}
if (ret > 0)
{
// loop through eset and check each with FD_ISSET. if you find some socket it means connect failed
// loop through wset and check each with FD_ISSET. If you find some socket check is there any pending connectin on that socket. If there is pending connection then that socket just got connected. Otherwise select just reported that some data has been sent and you can send more.
// finally, loop through rset and check each with FD_ISSET. If you find some socket then check is this socket your server socket (bind and listen). If its server socket then this is signal new client want to connect.. just call accept and new connection is established. If this is not server socket, then just do recv on that socket to collect new data.
}
There is few more things to handle... All sockets must be in non-blocking mode. Each send or recv calls will return -1 (error) but error code is EWOULDBLOCK. Thats normal and ignore error. If recv returns 0 then this connection is dropped. If send return 0 bytes sent then internal buffer is full.
You need to write additional code to serialize and parse data. For example, after recv, message may not be complete (depending on message size) so it may take more than one recv calls to receive complete message. Sometimes if messages is short recv call can deliver several messages in buffer. So, you need to write good parser or design good protocol, easy to parse.
First, regarding single-thread approach: I'd say it's bad idea because your server processing power is limited by performance of single processor core. But other than that it'll work to some extent.
Now about multiclient problem. I'd suggest using WSASend and WSARecv with their compilation routines. It also can be scaled to multiple threads if necessary.
Server core will look something like this:
struct SocketData {
::SOCKET socket;
::WSAOVERLAPPED overlapped;
::WSABUF bufferRef;
char buf [1024];
// other client-related data
SocketData (void) {
overlapped->hEvent = (HANDLE) this;
bufferRef->buf = buf;
bufferRef->len = sizeof (buf);
// ...
}
};
void OnRecv (
DWORD dwError,
DWORD cbTransferred,
LPWSAOVERLAPPED lpOverlapped,
DWORD dwFlags) {
auto data = (SocketData*) lpOverlapped->hEvent;
if (dwError || !cbTransferred) {
::closesocket (data->socket);
delete data;
return;
}
// process received data
// ...
}
// same for OnSend
void main (void) {
// init and start async listener
::SOCKET serverSocket = ::socket (...);
HANDLE hAccept = ::CreateEvent (nullptr, 0, 0, nullptr);
::WSAEventSelect (serverSocket, FD_ACCEPT, hAccept);
::bind (serverSocket, ...);
::listen (serverSocket, ...);
// main loop
for (;;) {
int r = ::WaitForSingleObjectEx (hAccept, INFINITE, 1);
if (r == WAIT_IO_COMPLETION)
continue;
// accept processing
auto data = new SocketData ();
data->socket = ::accept (serverSocket, ...);
// detach new socket from hAccept event
::WSAEventSelect (data->socket, 0, nullptr);
// recv first data from client
::WSARecv (
data->socket,
&data->bufferRef,
1,
nullptr,
0,
&data->overlapped,
&OnRecv);
}
}
Key points:
wait in main loop (WaitForSingleObjectEx, WaitForMultipleObjectsEx etc.) must be alertable;
most data processing done in OnSend/OnRecv;
all processing must be done without blocking APIs in OnSend/OnRecv;
for event-based processing events must be waited in main loop.
OnRecv will be called for each processed incoming packet. OnSend will be called for each processed outgoing packet. Keep in mind: how many data you asked to send/recv is not the same as what actually processed in packet.
I am trying to read data off an Openssl linked socket using SSL_read. I perform Openssl operations in client mode that sends command and receives data from a real-world server. I used two threads where one thread handles all Openssl operations like connect, write and close. I perform the SSL_read in a separate thread. I am able to read data properly when I issue SSL_read once.
But I ran into problems when I tried to perform multiple connect, write, close sequences. Ideally I should terminate the thread performing the SSL_read in response to close. This is because for the next connect we would get a new ssl pointer and so we do not want to perform read on old ssl pointer. But problem is when I do SSL_read, I am stuck until there is data available in SSL buffer. It gets blocked on the SSL pointer, even when I have closed the SSL connection in the other thread.
while(1) {
memset(sbuf, 0, sizeof(uint8_t) * TLS_READ_RCVBUF_MAX_LEN);
read_data_len = SSL_read(con, sbuf, TLS_READ_RCVBUF_MAX_LEN);
switch (SSL_get_error(con, read)) {
case SSL_ERROR_NONE:
.
.
.
}
I tried all possible solutions to the problem but non works. Mostly I tried indication for letting me know there might be data in SSL buffer, but none of it returns proper indication.
I tried:
- Doing SSL_pending first to know if there is data in SSL buffer. But this always returns zero
- Doing select on the Openssl socket to see if it returns value bigger than zero. But it always returns zero.
- Making the socket as non-blocking and trying the select, but it doesnt seem to work. I am not sure if I got the code properly.
An example of where I used select for blocking socket is as follows. But select always returns zero.
while(1) {
// The use of Select here is to timeout
// while waiting for data to read on SSL.
// The timeout is set to 1 second
i = select(width, &readfds, NULL,
NULL, &tv);
if (i < 0) {
// Select Error. Take appropriate action for this error
}
// Check if there is data to be read
if (i > 0) {
if (FD_ISSET(SSL_get_fd(con), &readfds)) {
// TODO: We have data in the SSL buffer. But are we
// sure that the data is from read buffer? If not,
// SSL_read can be stuck indefinitely.
// Maybe we can do SSL_read(con, sbuf, 0) followed
// by SSL_pending to find out?
memset(sbuf, 0, sizeof(uint8_t) * TLS_READ_RCVBUF_MAX_LEN);
read_data_len = SSL_read(con, sbuf, TLS_READ_RCVBUF_MAX_LEN);
error = SSL_get_error(con, read_data_len);
switch (error) {
.
.
}
So as you can see I have tried number of ways to get the thread performing SSL_read to terminate in response to close, but I didnt get it to work as I expected. Did anybody get to make SSL_read work properly? Is non-blocking socket only solution to my problem? For blocking socket how do you solve the problem of quitting from SSL_read if you never get a response for command? Can you give an example of working solution for non blocking socket with read?
I can point you to a working example of non-blocking client socket with SSL ... https://github.com/darrenjs/openssl_examples
It uses non-blocking sockets with standard linux IO (based on poll event loop). Raw data is read from the socket and then fed into SSL memory BIO's, which then perform the decryption.
The approach I used was single threaded. A single thread performs the connect, write, and read. This means there cannot be any problems associated with one thread closing a socket, while another thread is trying to use that socket. Also, as noted by the SSL FAQ, "an SSL connection cannot be used concurrently by multiple threads" (https://www.openssl.org/docs/faq.html#PROG1), so single threaded approach avoids problems with concurrent SSL write & read.
The challenge with single threaded approach is that you then need to create some kind of synchronized queue & signalling mechanism for submitting and holding data pending for outbound (eg, the commands that you want to send from client to server), and get the socket event loop to detect when there is data pending for write and pull it from the queue etc. For that I would would look at standard std::list, std::mutex etc, and either pipe2 or eventfd for signalling the event loop.
OpenSSL calls recv() which in turn obeys the SOCKET's timeout, which by default is infinite. You can change the timeout thusly:
void socket_timeout_receive_set(SOCKET handle, dword milliseconds)
{
if(handle==SOCKET_HANDLE_NULL)
return;
struct timeval tv = { long(milliseconds / 1000), (milliseconds % 1000) * 1000 };
setsockopt(handle, SOL_SOCKET, SO_RCVTIMEO, (char *)&tv, sizeof(tv));
}
Unfortunately, ssl_error_get() returns SSL_ERROR_SYSCALL which it returns in other situations too, so it's not easy to determine that it timed out. But this function will help you determine if the connection is lost:
bool socket_dropped(SOCKET handle)
{
// Special thanks: "Detecting and terminating aborted TCP/IP connections" by Vinayak Gadkari
if(handle==SOCKET_HANDLE_NULL)
return true;
// create a socket set containing just this socket
fd_set socket_set;
FD_ZERO(&socket_set);
FD_SET(handle, &socket_set);
// if the connection is unreadable, it is not dropped (strange but true)
static struct timeval timeout = { 0, 0 };
int count = select(0, &socket_set, NULL, NULL, &timeout);
if(count <= 0) {
// problem: count==0 on a connection that was cut off ungracefully, presumably by a busy router
// for connections that are open for a long time but may not talk much, call keepalive_set()
return false;
}
if(!FD_ISSET(handle, &socket_set)) // creates a dependency on __WSAFDIsSet()
return false;
// peek at the next character
// recv() returns 0 if the connection was dropped
char dummy;
count = recv(handle, &dummy, 1, MSG_PEEK);
if(count > 0)
return false;
if(count==0)
return true;
return sec==WSAECONNRESET || sec==WSAECONNABORTED || sec==WSAENETRESET || sec==WSAEINVAL;
}
I wrote simple TCP/IP multi-thread ANSI C server (client is C sharp), everything works fine except when the server doesnt receive proper signal from client it wont end the thread and close its socket (for example when client crash). Eventually it could become problem if those threads accumulate.
I got threads stored in Linked List - iterating through them isnt a problem. However they are all blocked by recv() by default and since dead client wont send anything they become stuck in memory.
What is the proper way of maintaining list of online clients? (or how to detect threads with broken connection).
struct tListItem {
pthread_t thisThread;
char* name;
int c_sockfd;
int run;
tListItem* next;
tListItem* prev;};
struct tList{
tListItem* head;
int count;};
code of thread:
while(param->run)
{
bzero(&buf, sizeof(buf));
if ((readLen = recv(param->c_sockfd, buf, BUFFSIZE, 0)) == -1)
{
perror("Read error");
param->run = 0;
}
else if (readLen > 0) {
printf("%s: %s \n", param->name, buf);
parseIncoming(param->c_sockfd, param, buf);}}
and here is my attempt to detect broken connection, but this causes the server to end with no message:
void* maintenance() {
tListItem *item;
char buf[4] = "PNG";
while(1)
{
usleep(2000000);
item= threadList->head;
while(item != 0)
{
if ((send(item->c_sockfd, buf, 3, NULL)) == -1)
{
perror("Write error");
item->run = 0;
}
item = item->next;
}
}
}
There's a few common ways this is dealt with:
Implement a heartbeat/ping-pong in your protocol on top of TCP. That is, periodically the client and/or server
sends a heartbeat message to the other end. If the server has not received any data or heartbeat messages within a period of time, e.g. two times the heartbeat period, or if sending the heartbeat message from the server fails, then consider the connection to be dead and close it.
Implement an overall data timeout. Each time the server receives data, you read time current time. Periodically you check the connection for when you last received data, and time out/close connections that haven't received data in a while.
Enable TCP keepalive. This is basically a last resort if you cannot do either 1. or 2.. It'll help you detect dead peers, as the TCP keepalives will break the connection if the peer cannot be reached. (Though it will not help you detect idle clients). Note that the default for keepalives is in the order of hours.
In all cases you should always to be read()/recv() or otherwise monitoring the socket for read events so you can learn as quick as possible if the connection actively breaks.
It's also quite hard to implement this if you're doing blocking read()/recv() calls, you would normally need to set a timeout on the read() so you can wake up periodically and send a heartbeat message or check if the client has been idle for too long - this is best done by using select()/poll() or the like so you can get a timeout instead of doing a block read() that might never return.
I have a TCP connection. Server just reads data from the client. Now, if the connection is lost, the client will get an error while writing the data to the pipe (broken pipe), but the server still listens on that pipe. Is there any way I can find if the connection is UP or NOT?
You could call getsockopt just like the following:
int error = 0;
socklen_t len = sizeof (error);
int retval = getsockopt (socket_fd, SOL_SOCKET, SO_ERROR, &error, &len);
To test if the socket is up:
if (retval != 0) {
/* there was a problem getting the error code */
fprintf(stderr, "error getting socket error code: %s\n", strerror(retval));
return;
}
if (error != 0) {
/* socket has a non zero error status */
fprintf(stderr, "socket error: %s\n", strerror(error));
}
The only way to reliably detect if a socket is still connected is to periodically try to send data. Its usually more convenient to define an application level 'ping' packet that the clients ignore, but if the protocol is already specced out without such a capability you should be able to configure tcp sockets to do this by setting the SO_KEEPALIVE socket option. I've linked to the winsock documentation, but the same functionality should be available on all BSD-like socket stacks.
TCP keepalive socket option (SO_KEEPALIVE) would help in this scenario and close server socket in case of connection loss.
There is an easy way to check socket connection state via poll call. First, you need to poll socket, whether it has POLLIN event.
If socket is not closed and there is data to read then read will return more than zero.
If there is no new data on socket, then POLLIN will be set to 0 in revents
If socket is closed then POLLIN flag will be set to one and read will return 0.
Here is small code snippet:
int client_socket_1, client_socket_2;
if ((client_socket_1 = accept(listen_socket, NULL, NULL)) < 0)
{
perror("Unable to accept s1");
abort();
}
if ((client_socket_2 = accept(listen_socket, NULL, NULL)) < 0)
{
perror("Unable to accept s2");
abort();
}
pollfd pfd[]={{client_socket_1,POLLIN,0},{client_socket_2,POLLIN,0}};
char sock_buf[1024];
while (true)
{
poll(pfd,2,5);
if (pfd[0].revents & POLLIN)
{
int sock_readden = read(client_socket_1, sock_buf, sizeof(sock_buf));
if (sock_readden == 0)
break;
if (sock_readden > 0)
write(client_socket_2, sock_buf, sock_readden);
}
if (pfd[1].revents & POLLIN)
{
int sock_readden = read(client_socket_2, sock_buf, sizeof(sock_buf));
if (sock_readden == 0)
break;
if (sock_readden > 0)
write(client_socket_1, sock_buf, sock_readden);
}
}
Very simple, as pictured in the recv.
To check that you will want to read 1 byte from the socket with MSG_PEEK and MSG_DONT_WAIT. This will not dequeue data (PEEK) and the operation is nonblocking (DONT_WAIT)
while (recv(client->socket,NULL,1, MSG_PEEK | MSG_DONTWAIT) != 0) {
sleep(rand() % 2); // Sleep for a bit to avoid spam
fflush(stdin);
printf("I am alive: %d\n", socket);
}
// When the client has disconnected, this line will execute
printf("Client %d went away :(\n", client->socket);
Found the example here.
I had a similar problem. I wanted to know whether the server is connected to client or the client is connected to server. In such circumstances the return value of the recv function can come in handy. If the socket is not connected it will return 0 bytes. Thus using this I broke the loop and did not have to use any extra threads of functions. You might also use this same if experts feel this is the correct method.
get sock opt may be somewhat useful, however, another way would to have a signal handler installed for SIGPIPE. Basically whenever you the socket connection breaks, the kernel will send a SIGPIPE signal to the process and then you can do the needful. But this still does not provide the solution for knowing the status of the connection. hope this helps.
You should try to use: getpeername function.
now when the connection is down you will get in errno:
ENOTCONN - The socket is not connected.
which means for you DOWN.
else (if no other failures) there the return code will 0 --> which means UP.
resources:
man page: http://man7.org/linux/man-pages/man2/getpeername.2.html
On Windows you can query the precise state of any port on any network-adapter using:
GetExtendedTcpTable
You can filter it to only those related to your process, etc and do as you wish periodically monitoring as needed. This is "an alternative" approach.
You could also duplicate the socket handle and set up an IOCP/Overlapped i/o wait on the socket and monitor it that way as well.
#include <sys/socket.h>
#include <poll.h>
...
int client = accept(sock_fd, (struct sockaddr*)&address, (socklen_t*)&addrlen);
pollfd pfd = {client, POLLERR, 0}; // monitor errors occurring on client fd
...
while(true)
{
...
if(not check_connection(pfd, 5))
{
close(client);
close(sock[1]);
if(reconnect(HOST, PORT, reconnect_function))
printf("Reconnected.\n");
pfd = {client, POLLERR, 0};
}
...
}
...
bool check_connection(pollfd &pfd, int poll_timeout)
{
poll(&pfd, 1, poll_timeout);
return not (pfd.revents & POLLERR);
}
you can use SS_ISCONNECTED macro in getsockopt() function.
SS_ISCONNECTED is define in socketvar.h.
For BSD sockets I'd check out Beej's guide. When recv returns 0 you know the other side disconnected.
Now you might actually be asking, what is the easiest way to detect the other side disconnecting? One way of doing it is to have a thread always doing a recv. That thread will be able to instantly tell when the client disconnects.