From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:33771) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dg9EN-00052E-Qh for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 11 Aug 2017 08:40:01 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dg9EM-0007dY-LA for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Fri, 11 Aug 2017 08:39:59 -0400 Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2017 13:39:43 +0100 From: "Dr. David Alan Gilbert" Message-ID: <20170811123942.GC2076@work-vm> References: <20170810160451.32723-1-berrange@redhat.com> <20170810160451.32723-3-berrange@redhat.com> <20170811122559.GB2076@work-vm> <20170811122936.GK2554@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20170811122936.GK2554@redhat.com> Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH 2/8] io: introduce a network socket listener API List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: "Daniel P. Berrange" Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Eric Blake , Paolo Bonzini , Kevin Wolf , Max Reitz , =?iso-8859-1?Q?Marc-Andr=E9?= Lureau , Juan Quintela , Gerd Hoffmann , qemu-block@nongnu.org * Daniel P. Berrange (berrange@redhat.com) wrote: > On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 01:26:00PM +0100, Dr. David Alan Gilbert wrote: > > * Daniel P. Berrange (berrange@redhat.com) wrote: > > > The existing QIOChannelSocket class provides the ability to > > > listen on a single socket at a time. This patch introduces > > > a QIONetListener class that provides a higher level API > > > concept around listening for network services, allowing > > > for listening on multiple sockets. > > > > What protects against a connection on more than one of the sockets? > > That's not the responsibility of this module. If a backend only > wants to allow a single client at a time, it has to unregister > the new client callback and re-register when it is ready to > accept a new client. This aspect is no different to the existing > case of multiple clients connecting to a single listener socket. OK, and we guarantee that we never call accept() twice because we make sure we do that unregister before we get back to the main loop? Dave > > Regards, > Daniel > -- > |: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :| > |: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :| > |: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :| -- Dr. David Alan Gilbert / dgilbert@redhat.com / Manchester, UK