Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add support for socket asynchronous api for recv & recvfrom #1390

Draft
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: feature/distributed-erlang
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

pguyot
Copy link
Collaborator

@pguyot pguyot commented Dec 7, 2024

These changes are made under both the "Apache 2.0" and the "GNU Lesser General
Public License 2.1 or later" license terms (dual license).

SPDX-License-Identifier: Apache-2.0 OR LGPL-2.1-or-later

@pguyot pguyot force-pushed the w49/add-support-for-socket-asynchronous-api branch 7 times, most recently from 5d52096 to 9c3c068 Compare December 8, 2024 09:36
@pguyot pguyot changed the base branch from main to feature/distributed-erlang December 8, 2024 09:37
@pguyot pguyot force-pushed the w49/add-support-for-socket-asynchronous-api branch 16 times, most recently from 3957e08 to 6c02e94 Compare December 14, 2024 20:31
@pguyot pguyot force-pushed the w49/add-support-for-socket-asynchronous-api branch 2 times, most recently from adeb52b to b9aa1d6 Compare December 23, 2024 21:04
Also improve socket stability.

Signed-off-by: Paul Guyot <pguyot@kallisys.net>
@pguyot pguyot force-pushed the w49/add-support-for-socket-asynchronous-api branch from b9aa1d6 to f186dc1 Compare December 24, 2024 17:15
@pguyot pguyot marked this pull request as ready for review December 24, 2024 17:15
@pguyot pguyot mentioned this pull request Dec 25, 2024
@@ -18,6 +18,7 @@
# SPDX-License-Identifier: Apache-2.0 OR LGPL-2.1-or-later
#

include(ExternalProject)
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Just for my understanding: what is the purpose of this specific change?

Copy link
Collaborator Author

@pguyot pguyot Dec 26, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I believe it was required when I compiled this on some esoteric platform to try to reproduce CI issues.

@bettio
Copy link
Collaborator

bettio commented Dec 26, 2024

Is this PR a good opportunity for supporting both active and passive ssl sockets (and also when using socket as backend for gen_tcp and gen_udp)?
If so I suggest adding additional commits inside of this PR instead having just one: I rather prefer having a layered PR that is more comfortable to review step by step rather a monolithic one.

@pguyot pguyot marked this pull request as draft December 26, 2024 18:35
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants