Determine between socket and fd - c

On unix everything is a file approach of function read(), write(), close() is not supported on Win32.
I want to emulate it but have no idea how to distinguish when sock is socket or fd on WinSocks2.
//returns 1 if `sock` is network socket,
// 0 if `sock` is file desriptor (including stdio, stderr, stdout), ...
// -1 in none of above
int is_net_socket(int sock)
{
// ...?
}
This should work as in :
int mysock = socket(PF_INET, SOCK_STREAM, 0);
int myfd = _open("my_file.txt", _O_RDONLY);
printf("1: %d 2: %d 3: %d 4:%d\n",
is_net_socket(mysock), //1
is_net_socket(myfd), //0
is_net_socket(stdin), //0
is_net_socket(stderr)); //0
// should print "1: 1 2: 0 3: 0 4:0"
How to implement is_net_socket in order to use it as in:
int my_close(int sock)
{
#if ON_WINDOWS
switch( is_net_socket(sock) ) {
case 1: return closesocket(sock);
case 0: return _close(sock);
default: //handle error...
}
#else
return close(sock);
#endif
}

Not sure where you're getting the idea that Windows won't allow you to use SOCKET handles as files - as clearly stated on the Socket Handles page:
A socket handle can optionally be a file handle in Windows Sockets 2. A socket handle from a Winsock provider can be used with other non-Winsock functions such as ReadFile, WriteFile, ReadFileEx, and WriteFileEx.
Anyways, as to how to distinguish between them on Windows, see the function NtQueryObject, which will return a handle name of \Device\Tcp if the handle passed to it is an open SOCKET. Read the "Remarks" section for the structure returned by this call.
Note that this approach only works XP and up, and will fail on Windows 2000 (which I'm assuming is old enough that it doesn't affect you.)

I suppose you can use select to query the status of a socket.
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms740141%28VS.85%29.aspx
I would recommend grouping your file desc and sockets in a single struct. You can declare an enum to tell if the descriptor is a file or socket. I know this might not be as dynamic as you want, but generally when you create portable applications, its best to abstract those details away.
Example:
enum type { SOCKET, FILE };
typedef struct
{
unsigned int id;
type dataType;
} descriptor_t;
int close(descriptor_t sock)
{
#if WIN32
if (sock.dataType == SOCKET)
return closesocket(sock.id);
else
return _close(sock.id);
#else
return close(sock.id);
#endif
}

I suspect... but I am not sure, that fds and sockets on Windows use separate namespaces. Therefore the number for a socket and a file could be the same, and it is impossible to know which one you are talking about when you call is_net_socket.
Try printing out socket and fd numbers to see if they are ever the same as each other at the same time.

If the Windows 'C' library has dup() you could try to dup it, which should fail for a socket but succeed for a file fd. So:
int is_net_socket(fd)
{
return close(dup(fd)) != 0;
}
Warning: untested theory with untested dependency ;-) Note that this would return misleading results if you run out of fd's. Another side effect is that if it is a file it will be flushed and its directory entry updated. All in all it probably sucks frankly. I might even downvote it myself.

Related

Socket programming for multi-clients with 'select()' in C

This is a question about socket programming for multi-client.
While I was thinking how to make my single client and server program
to multi clients,I encountered how to implement this.
But even if I was searching for everything, kind of confusion exists.
I was thinking to implement with select(), because it is less heavy than fork.
but I have much global variables not to be shared, so I hadn`t considered thread to use.
and so to use select(), I could have the general knowledge about FD_functions to utilize, but here I have my question, because generally in the examples on websites, it only shows multi-client server program...
Since I use sequential recv() and send() in client and also in server program
that work really well when it`s single client and server, but
I have no idea about how it must be changed for multi cilent.
Does the client also must be unblocking?
What are all requirements for select()?
The things I did on my server program to be multi-client
1) I set my socket option for reuse address, with SO_REUSEADDR
2) and set my server as non-blocking mode with O_NONBLOCK using fctl().
3) and put the timeout argument as zero.
and proper use of FD_functions after above.
But when I run my client program one and many more, from the second client,
client program blocks, not getting accepted by server.
I guess the reason is because I put my server program`s main function part
into the 'recv was >0 ' case.
for example with my server code,
(I`m using temp and read as fd_set, and read as master in this case)
int main(void)
{
int conn_sock, listen_sock;
struct sockaddr_in s_addr, c_addr;
int rq, ack;
char path[100];
int pre, change, c;
int conn, page_num, x;
int c_len = sizeof(c_addr);
int fd;
int flags;
int opt = 1;
int nbytes;
fd_set read, temp;
if ((listen_sock = socket(AF_INET, SOCK_STREAM, IPPROTO_TCP)) < 0)
{
perror("socket error!");
return 1;
}
memset(&s_addr, 0, sizeof(s_addr));
s_addr.sin_family = AF_INET;
s_addr.sin_addr.s_addr = htonl(INADDR_ANY);
s_addr.sin_port = htons(3500);
if (setsockopt(listen_sock, SOL_SOCKET, SO_REUSEADDR, &opt, sizeof(int)) == -1)
{
perror("Server-setsockopt() error ");
exit(1);
}
flags = fcntl(listen_sock, F_GETFL, 0);
fcntl(listen_sock, F_SETFL, flags | O_NONBLOCK);
//fcntl(listen_sock, F_SETOWN, getpid());
bind(listen_sock, (struct sockaddr*) &s_addr, sizeof(s_addr));
listen(listen_sock, 8);
FD_ZERO(&read);
FD_ZERO(&temp);
FD_SET(listen_sock, &read);
while (1)
{
temp = read;
if (select(FD_SETSIZE, &temp, (fd_set *) 0, (fd_set *) 0,
(struct timeval *) 0) < 1)
{
perror("select error:");
exit(1);
}
for (fd = 0; fd < FD_SETSIZE; fd++)
{
//CHECK all file descriptors
if (FD_ISSET(fd, &temp))
{
if (fd == listen_sock)
{
conn_sock = accept(listen_sock, (struct sockaddr *) &c_addr, &c_len);
FD_SET(conn_sock, &read);
printf("new client got session: %d\n", conn_sock);
}
else
{
nbytes = recv(fd, &conn, 4, 0);
if (nbytes <= 0)
{
close(fd);
FD_CLR(fd, &read);
}
else
{
if (conn == Session_Rq)
{
ack = Session_Ack;
send(fd, &ack, sizeof(ack), 0);
root_setting();
c = 0;
while (1)
{
c++;
printf("in while loop\n");
recv(fd, &page_num, 4, 0);
if (c > 1)
{
change = compare_with_pre_page(pre, page_num);
if (change == 1)
{
page_stack[stack_count] = page_num;
stack_count++;
}
else
{
printf("same as before page\n");
}
} //end of if
else if (c == 1)
{
page_stack[stack_count] = page_num;
stack_count++;
}
printf("stack count:%d\n", stack_count);
printf("in page stack: <");
for (x = 0; x < stack_count; x++)
{
printf(" %d ", page_stack[x]);
}
printf(">\n");
rq_handler(fd);
if (logged_in == 1)
{
printf("You are logged in state now, user: %s\n",
curr_user.ID);
}
else
{
printf("not logged in.\n");
c = 0;
}
pre = page_num;
} //end of while
} //end of if
}
} //end of else
} //end of fd_isset
} //end of for loop
} //end of outermost while
}
if needed for code explanation : What I was about to work of this code was,
to make kind of web pages to implement 'browser' for server.
I wanted to make every client get session for server to get login-page or so.
But the execution result is, as I told above.
Why is that?
the socket in the client program must be non-blocking mode too
to be used with non-blocking Server program to use select()?
Or should I use fork or thread to make multi client and manage with select?
The reason I say this is, after I considered a lot about this problem,
'select()' seems only proper for multi client chatting program... that many
'forked' or 'threaded' clients can pend to, in such as chat room.
how do you think?...
Is select also possible or proper thing to use for normal multi-client program?
If there something I missed to let my multi client program work fine,
please give me some knowledge of yours or some requirements for the proper use of select.
I didn`t know multi-client communication was not this much easy before :)
I also considered to use epoll but I think I need to understand first about select well.
Thanks for reading.
Besides the fact you want to go from single-client to multi-client, it's not very clear what's blocking you here.
Are you sure you fully understood how does select is supposed to work ? The manual (man 2 select on Linux) may be helpful, as it provides a simple example. You can also check Wikipedia.
To answer your questions :
First of all, are you sure you need non-blocking mode for your sockets ? Unless you have a good reason to do so, blocking sockets are also fine for multi-client networking.
Usually, there are basically two ways to deal with multi-clients in C: fork, or select. The two aren't really used altogether (or I don't know how :-) ). Models using lightweight threads are essentially asynchronous programming (did I mention it also depends on what you mean by 'asynchronous' ?) and may be a bit overkill for what you seem to do (a good example in C++ is Boost.Asio).
As you probably already know, the main problem when dealing with more than one client is that I/O operations, like a read, are blocking, not letting us know when there's a new client, or when a client has said something.
The fork way is pretty straighforward : the server socket (the one which accepts the connections) is in the main process, and each time it accepts a new client, it forks a whole new process just to monitor this new client : this new process will be dedicated to it. Since there's one process per client, we don't care if i/o operations are blocking or not.
The select way allows us to monitor multiple clients in one same process : it is a multiplexer telling us when something happens on the sockets we give it. The base idea, on the server side, is first to put the server socket on the read_fds FD_SET of the select. Each time select returns, you need to do a special check for it : if the server socket is set in the read_fds set (using FD_ISSET(...)), it means you have a new client connecting : you can then call accept on your server socket to create the connection.
Then you have to put all your clients sockets in the fd_sets you give to select in order to monitor any change on it (e.g., incoming messages).
I'm not really sure of what you don't understand about select, so that's for the big explaination. But long story short, select is a clean and neat way to do single-threaded, synchronous networking, and it can absolutely manage multiple clients at the same time without using any fork or threads. Be aware though that if you absolutely want to deal with non-blocking sockets with select, you have to deal extra error conditions that wouldn't be in a blocking way (the Wikipedia example shows it well as they have to check if errno isn't EWOULDBLOCK). But that's another story.
EDIT : Okay, with a little more code it's easier to know what's wrong.
select's first parameter should be nfds+1, i.e. "the highest-numbered file descriptor in any of the three sets, plus 1" (cf. manual), not FD_SETSIZE, which is the maximum size of an FD_SET. Usually it is the last accept-ed client socket (or the server socket at beginning) who has it.
You shouldn't do the "CHECK all file descriptors" for loop like that. FD_SETSIZE, e.g. on my machine, equal to 1024. That means once select returns, even if you have just one client you would be passing in the loop 1024 times ! You can set fd to 0 (like in the Wikipedia example), but since 0 is stdin, 1 stdout and 2 stderr, unless you're monitoring one of those, you can directly set it to your server socket's fd (since it is probably the first of the monitored sockets, given socket numbers always increase), and iterate until it is equal to "nfds" (the currently highest fd).
Not sure that it is mandatory, but before each call to select, you should clear (with FD_ZERO for example) and re-populate your read fd_set with all the sockets you want to monitor (i.e. your server socket and all your clients sockets). Once again, inspire yourself of the Wikipedia example.

Is it reasonable to expect that in Linux, fd < maximum number of open file descriptors?

I'm writing a server that needs to handle many open sockets, so I use setrlimit() to set the maximum number of open file descriptors (as root, before dropping privileges) like so:
#include <sys/resource.h>
#define MAX_FD_C 9001
if (setrlimit(
RLIMIT_NOFILE, &(struct rlimit){.rlim_cur = MAX_FD_C, .rlim_max = MAX_FD_C}
) == -1) {
perror("Failed to set the maximum number of open file descriptors");
return EXIT_FAILURE;
}
Now, I realize there probably won't be any guarantees and that I'm at the mercy of whatever method the Linux kernel uses to implements file descriptor tables; but in practice, is it reasonable to assume that any fd this program receives from the Linux kernel will have a value less than the MAX_FD_C I set above?
I'd like to keep per socket data as compact as possible which could mean simply using an array like static struct client clients[MAX_FD_C] = {{0}}; and using the fd as the index to the client struct (which would basically be my own version of the FDT).
There are functions in the POSIX standard which assume this already. Have a look at FD_SETSIZE, select(), FD_SET.

Read/Write struct to fifo in C

I'm trying to pass structs between processes using named pipes. I got stuck at trying to open the pipe non-blocking mode. Here's my code for writing to the fifo:
void writeUpdate() {
// Create fifo for writing updates:
strcpy(fifo_write, routing_table->routerName);
// Check if fifo exists:
if(access(fifo_write, F_OK) == -1 )
fd_write = mkfifo(fifo_write, 0777);
else if(access(fifo_write, F_OK) == 0) {
printf("writeUpdate: FIFO %s already exists\n", fifo_write);
//fd_write = open(fifo_write, O_WRONLY|O_NONBLOCK);
}
fd_write = open(fifo_write, O_WRONLY|O_NONBLOCK);
if(fd_write < 0)
perror("Create fifo error");
else {
int num_bytes = write(fd_write, routing_table, sizeof(routing_table));
if(num_bytes == 0)
printf("Nothing was written to FIFO %s\n", fifo_write);
printf("Wrote %d bytes. Sizeof struct: %d\n", num_bytes,sizeof(routing_table)+1);
}
close(fd_write);
}
routing_table is a pointer to my struct, it's allocated, so there's no prob with the name of the fifo or smth like that.
If I open the fifo without the O_NONBLOCK option, it writes smth for the first time, but then it blocks because I'm having troubles reading the struct too. And after the first time, the initial fifo is created, but other fifo's appear, named '.', '..'.
With O_NONBLOCK option set, it creates the fifo but always throws an error: 'No such device or address'. Any idea why this happens? Thanks.
EDIT: Ok, so I'm clear now about opening the fifo, but I have another problem, in fact reading/writing the struct to the fifo was my issue to start with. My code to read the struct:
void readUpdate() {
struct rttable *updateData;
allocate();
strcpy(fifo_read, routing_table->table[0].router);
// Check if fifo exists:
if(access(fifo_read, F_OK) == -1 )
fd_read = mkfifo(fifo_read, 777);
else if(access(fifo_read, F_OK) == 0) {
printf("ReadUpdate: FIFO %s already exists\n Reading from %s\n", fifo_read, fifo_read);
}
fd_read = open(fifo_read, O_RDONLY|O_NONBLOCK);
int num_bytes = read(fd_read, updateData, sizeof(updateData));
close(fd_read);
if(num_bytes > 0) {
if(updateData == NULL)
printf("Read data is null: yes");
else
printf("Read from fifo: %s %d\n", updateData->routerName, num_bytes);
int result = unlink(fifo_read);
if(result < 0)
perror("Unlink fifo error\n");
else {
printf("Unlinking successful for fifo %s\n", fifo_read);
printf("Updating table..\n");
//update(updateData);
print_table_update(updateData);
}
} else
printf("Nothing was read from FIFO %s\n", fifo_read);
}
It opens the fifo and tries to read, but it seems like nothing is in the fifo, although in writeUpdate the first time it says it wrote 4 bytes (this seems wrong too). At reading, first time around it prints 'a' and then num_bytes is always <=0.
I've looked around and only found this example, with simple write/read, is there smth more needed when writing a struct?
My struct looks like this:
typedef struct distance_table {
char dest[20]; //destination network
char router[20]; // via router..
int distance;
} distance_table;
typedef struct rttable {
char routerName[10];
char networkName[20];
struct distance_table table[50];
int nrRouters;
} rttable;
struct rttable *routing_table;
"No such device or address" is the ENXIO error message. If you look at the open man page, you'll see that this error is reported in particular if:
O_NONBLOCK | O_WRONLY is set, the named file is a FIFO and no process
has the file open for reading. (...)
which is exactly your situation. So the behavior you are seeing is normal: you can't write (without blocking) to a pipe that has no readers. The kernel won't buffer your messages if nothing is connected to the pipe for reading.
So make sure you start the "consumer(s)" before your "producer", or remove the non-blocking option on the producer.
BTW: using access is, in most circumstances, opening yourself to time of check to time of use issues. Don't use it. Try the mkfifo - if it works, you're good. If it fails with EEXISTS, you're good too. If it fails otherwise, clean up and bail out.
For the second part of your question, it really depends completely on how exactly the data you are trying to send is structured. Serializing a random struct in C is not easy at all, especially if it contains variable data (like char *s for example).
If you struct contains only primitive types (and no pointers), and both sides are on the same machine (and compiled with the same compiler), then a raw write on one side and read on the other of the whole struct should work.
You can look at C - Serialization techniques for more complex data types for example.
Concerning your specific example: you're getting mixed up between pointers to your structs and plain structs.
On the write side you have:
int num_bytes = write(fd_write, routing_table, sizeof(routing_table));
This is incorrect since routing_table is a pointer. You need:
int num_bytes = write(fd_write, routing_table, sizeof(*routing_table));
// or sizeof(struct rttable)
Same thing on the read side. On the receiving size you're also not allocating updateData as far as I can tell. You need to do that too (with malloc, and remember to free it).
struct rttable *updateData = malloc(sizeof(struct rrtable));

using select to read from socket and stdin

I'm writing a ncurses based chat program. At first, I wrote just networking stuff (without ncurses) and everything worked fine, but after adding graphics I can't get the client app to work properly.
The main problem is reading from stdin and socket at the same time. In ncurses-less version I've used pthread and it worked like charm. Alas, it seems that pthread and ncurses don't go together very well, so I had to find another solution.
I thought that select() would do, but it still only reads from stdin and completely ignores the socket.
Here is the whole code: code
The interesting part is:
char message[1024];
fd_set master;
fd_set read_fds;
FD_ZERO(&master);
FD_ZERO(&read_fds);
FD_SET(0,&master);
FD_SET(s,&master); // s is a socket descriptor
while(true){
read_fds = master;
if (select(2,&read_fds,NULL,NULL,NULL) == -1){
perror("select:");
exit(1);
}
// if there are any data ready to read from the socket
if (FD_ISSET(s, &read_fds)){
n = read(s,buf,max);
buf[n]=0;
if(n<0)
{
printf("Blad odczytu z gniazdka");
exit(1);
}
mvwprintw(output_window,1,1,"%s\n",buf);
}
// if there is something in stdin
if (FD_ISSET(0, &read_fds)){
getstr(message);
move(CURS_Y++,CURS_X);
if (CURS_Y == LINES-2){
CURS_Y = 1;
}
n = write(s,message,strlen(message));
if (n < 0){
perror("writeThread:");
exit(1);
}
}
}
It's possible that I don't fully understand how select() works, or maybe I shouldn't have connect()ed the socket.. I'm lost here. I would appreciate any help! Thanks.
Your problem is in the select().
The first parameter is not the number of file descriptors you are passing in read_fds, but it's the highest socket ID + 1.
From the man page:
The first nfds descriptors are checked in each set; i.e., the
descriptors from 0 through nfds-1 in the descriptor sets are examined. (Example: If you have set two file descriptors "4" and "17", nfds should not be "2", but rather "17 + 1" or "18".)
So in your code, instead of '2', try passing 's+1'.
You need to specify the highest file descriptor to select:
if (select(s + 1,&read_fds,NULL,NULL,NULL) == -1){
select() needs to know the number of file descriptors that it is supposed to watch.

What is wrong with this _popen / select example?

UPDATE: i updated the code and problem description to reflect my changes.
I know now that i'm trying a Socket operation on nonsocket. or that my fd_set is not valid since:
select returns -1 and
WSAGetLastError()returns 10038.
But i can't seem to figure out what it is. Platform is Windows. I have not posted the WSAStartup part.
int loop = 0;
FILE *output
int main()
{
fd_set fd;
output = _popen("tail -f test.txt","r");
while(forceExit == 0)
{
FD_ZERO(&fd);
FD_SET(_fileno(output),&fd);
int returncode = select(_fileno(output)+1,&fd,NULL,NULL,NULL);
if(returncode == 0)
{
printf("timed out");
}
else if (returncode < 0)
{
printf("returncode: %d\n",returncode);
printf("Last Error: %d\n",WSAGetLastError());
}
else
{
if(FD_ISSET(_fileno(output),&fd))
{
if(fgets(buff, sizeof(buff), output) != NULL )
{
printf("Output: %s\n", buff);
}
}
else
{
printf(".");
}
}
Sleep(500);
}
return 0;
}
The new outcome now is of course the print out of the returncode and the last error.
You have some data ready to be read, but you are not actually reading anything. When you poll the descriptor next time, the data will still be there. Drain the pipe before you continue to poll.
As far as I can tell, Windows anonymous pipes cannot be used with non-blocking calls like select. So, while your _popen and select code looks good independently, you can't join the two together.
Here's a similar thread elsewhere.
It's possible that calling SetNamedPipeHandleState with the PIPE_NOWAIT flag might work for you, but MSDN is more than a little cryptic on the subject.
So, I think you need to look at other ways of achieving this. I'd suggest having the reading in a separate thread, and use normal blocking I/O.
First of all, as yourself and others have pointed out, select() is only valid for sockets under Windows. select() does not work on streams which is what _popen() returns. Error 10038 clearly identifies this.
I don't get what the purpose of your example is. If you simply want to spawn a process and collect it's stdout, just do this (which comes directly from the MSDN _popen page):
int main( void )
{
char psBuffer[128];
FILE *pPipe;
if( (pPipe = _popen("tail -f test.txt", "rt" )) == NULL )
exit( 1 );
/* Read pipe until end of file, or an error occurs. */
while(fgets(psBuffer, 128, pPipe))
{
printf(psBuffer);
}
/* Close pipe and print return value of pPipe. */
if (feof( pPipe))
{
printf( "\nProcess returned %d\n", _pclose( pPipe ) );
}
else
{
printf( "Error: Failed to read the pipe to the end.\n");
}
}
That's it. No select required.
And I'm not sure how threads will help you here, this will just complicate your problem.
The first thing that I notice is wrong is that you are calling FD_ISSET on your exceptfds in each conditional. I think that you want something like this:
if (FD_ISSET(filePointer,&fd))
{
printf("i have data\n");
}
else ....
The except field in the select is typically used to report errors or out-of-band data on a socket. When one of the descriptors of your exception is set, it doesn't mean an error necessarily, but rather some "message" (i.e. out-of-band data). I suspect that for your application, you can probably get by without putting your file descriptor inside of an exception set. If you truly want to check for errors, you need to be checking the return value of select and doing something if it returns -1 (or SOCKET_ERROR on Windows). I'm not sure of your platform so I can't be more specific about the return code.
select() first argument is the highest number file descriptor in your set, plus 1. (i.e. output+1)
select(output+1, &fd, NULL, &exceptfds, NULL);
The first FD_ISSET(...) should be on the fd_set fd.
if (FD_ISSET(filePointer, &fd))
Your data stream has data, then you need to read that data stream. Use fgets(...) or similar to read from the data source.
char buf[1024];
...
fgets(buf, sizeof(buf) * sizeof(char), output);
The first argument to select needs to be the highest-numbered file descriptor in any of the three sets, plus 1:
int select(int nfds, fd_set *readfds, fd_set *writefds,
fd_set *exceptfds, struct timeval *timeout);
Also:
if(FD_ISSET(filePointer,&exceptfds))
{
printf("i have data\n");
}
Should be:
if(FD_ISSET(filePointer,&fd))
{
printf("i have data\n");
}
You should check the return code from select().
You also need to reset the fdsets each time you call select().
You don't need timeout since you're not using it.
Edit:
Apparently on Windows, nfds is ignored, but should probably be set correctly, just so the code is more portable.
If you want to use a timeout, you need to pass it into the select call as the last argument:
// Reset fd, exceptfds, and timeout before each select()...
int result = select(maxFDPlusOne, &fd, NULL, &exceptfds, &timeout);
if (result == 0)
{
// timeout
}
else if (result < 0)
{
// error
}
else
{
// something happened
if (FD_ISSET(filePointer,&fd))
{
// Need to read the data, otherwise you'll get notified each time.
}
}
since select doesn't work i used threads, specifically _beginthread , _beginthreadex.

Resources