PERFORCE change 119444 for review
Julian Elischer
julian at elischer.org
Tue May 8 18:58:00 UTC 2007
Marko Zec wrote:
> On Tuesday 08 May 2007 02:04:30 Julian Elischer wrote:
>> Marko Zec wrote:
>>> On Tuesday 08 May 2007 01:22:59 Julian Elischer wrote:
>>>> Marko Zec wrote:
>>>>> http://perforce.freebsd.org/chv.cgi?CH=119444
>>>>>
>>>>> Change 119444 by zec at zec_tpx32 on 2007/05/07 22:51:07
>>>>>
>>>>> Add support for free-floating ng_hub and ng_bridge instances.
>>>>>
>>>>> If a hook named "anchor" is created on a ng_hub or ng_bridge
>>>>> node instance, the node will not self-destruct even if it
>>>>> has no hooks connected. Reminder: normal behavior is that
>>>>> hub or bridge nodes automatically destroy themselves when
>>>>> the last hook is disconnected.
>>>> What is this hook attached to?
>>>> One could just as easily send them a 'become persistant' message..
>>>> It would be a good candidate for a generic message.
>>>> Data is still sent to this hook. is that what is expected?
>>> This hook should typically disappear right after it is created, if
>>> we use it like this:
>>>
>>> tpx32# ngctl mkpeer hub anchor anchor
>>> tpx32# ngctl l
>>> There are 3 total nodes:
>>> Name: ngctl69865 Type: socket ID: 0000040d Num hooks: 0
>>> Name: <unnamed> Type: hub ID: 0000040b Num hooks: 0
>>> Name: em0 Type: ether ID: 00000004 Num hooks: 0
>>>
>>> Yes, the only purpose of this is to pin-up the node. We cannot
>>> send a 'become persistant' message to a node that doesn't exist...
>>> Or do you have an alternative suggestion to achieve this
>>> functionality? I really need this badly for IMUNES...
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>> Marko
>> there is a hook when you create it.. you send it the message, then
>> you can remove the hook.
>
> I'd be sold on the concept you propose if I had an idea how to use it
> from non-interactive scripts in a reasonably simple way. For example:
>
> tpx32# ngctl -f -
> mkpeer hub x x
> list
> # XXX what now? Send "pin-up" message to which node?
>
> There are 3 total nodes:
> Name: <unnamed> Type: hub ID: 00000429 Num hooks: 1
> Name: ngctl93546 Type: socket ID: 00000428 Num hooks: 1
> Name: em0 Type: ether ID: 00000004 Num hooks: 0
msg .:x pin {value=1}
>
> My point is that even if we don't close the controlling socket (we
> remain in ngctl) so that we don't loose the newly created node right
> away, how can we at this point know the address of the new node without
> going through some woodo magic style parsing of the output from
> currently running ngctl process, and then feeding the result back to
> its standard input?
>
> Marko
>
More information about the p4-projects
mailing list