5 Commits

Author	SHA1	Message	Date
Andrew Tridgell	3d589a0995	r7294: implemented the irpc messaging system. This is the core of the ... management system I proposed on samba-technical a couple of days ago. Essentially it is a very lightweight way for any code in Samba to make IDL based rpc calls to anywhere else in the code, without the client or server having to go to the trouble of setting up a full rpc service. It can be used with any of our existing IDL, but I expect it will mostly be used for a new set of Samba specific management calls. The LOCAL-IRPC torture test demonstrates how it can be used by calling the echo_AddOne() call over this transport.	2007-10-10 13:17:37 -05:00
Andrew Tridgell	0d51511d40	r3507: - added deferred replies on sharing violation in pvfs open. The ... deferred reply is short-circuited immediately when the file is closed by another user, allowing it to be opened by the waiting user. - added a sane set of timeval manipulation routines - converted all the events code and code that uses it to use struct timeval instead of time_t, which allows for microsecond resolution instead of 1 second resolution. This was needed for doing the pvfs deferred open code, and is why the patch is so big.	2007-10-10 13:05:23 -05:00
Andrew Tridgell	cc93813e4a	r3271: use "struct messaging_context *" instead of "void *" in messaging API	2007-10-10 13:04:48 -05:00
Andrew Tridgell	4395c0557a	r3029: implemented byte range lock timeouts. ... This adds a pvfs_wait_message() routine which uses the new messaging system, event timers and talloc destructors to give a nice generic async event handling system with a easy to use interface. The extensions to pvfs_lock.c are based on calls to pvfs_wait_message() routines. We now pass all of our smbtorture locking tests, although while writing this code I have thought of some additonal tests that should be added, particularly for lock cancel operations. I'll work on that soon. This commit also extends the smbtorture lock tests to test the rather weird 0xEEFFFFFF locking semantics that I have discovered in win2003. Win2003 treats the 0xEEFFFFFF boundary as special, and will give different error codes on either side of it. Locks on both sides are allowed, the only difference is which error code is given when a lock is denied. Anyone like to hazard a guess as to why? It has me stumped.	2007-10-10 13:00:00 -05:00
Andrew Tridgell	b0510b5428	first public release of samba4 code	-