Add start_server() and accept() methods that can be used instead of
start_server_and_accept() to allow more fine-grained control over the
incoming connection process.
(Eagle-eyed reviewers will surely notice that it's a bit weird that
"CONNECTING" is a state that's shared between both the start_server()
and connect() states. That's absolutely true, and it's very true that
checking on the presence of _accepted as an indicator of state is a
hack. That's also very certainly true. But ... this keeps client code an
awful lot simpler, as it doesn't have to care exactly *how* the
connection is being made, just that it *is*. Is it worth disrupting that
simplicity in order to provide a better state guard on `accept()`? Hm.)
Signed-off-by: John Snow <jsnow@redhat.com>
Acked-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Daniel P. Berrangé <berrange@redhat.com>
Message-id: 20220225205948.3693480-9-jsnow@redhat.com
Signed-off-by: John Snow <jsnow@redhat.com>
Refactor _do_accept() into _do_start_server() and _do_accept(). As of
this commit, the former calls the latter, but in subsequent commits
they'll be split apart.
(So please forgive the misnomer for _do_start_server(); it will live up
to its name shortly, and the docstring will be updated then too. I'm
just cutting down on some churn.)
Signed-off-by: John Snow <jsnow@redhat.com>
Acked-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Daniel P. Berrangé <berrange@redhat.com>
Message-id: 20220225205948.3693480-7-jsnow@redhat.com
Signed-off-by: John Snow <jsnow@redhat.com>
These two methods attempted to entirely envelop the logic of
establishing a connection to a peer start to finish. However, we need to
break apart the incoming connection step into more granular steps. We
will no longer be able to reasonably constrain the logic inside of these
helper functions.
So, remove them - with _session_guard(), they no longer serve a real
purpose.
Although the public API doesn't change, the internal API does. Now that
there are no intermediary methods between e.g. connect() and
_do_connect(), there's no hook where the runstate is set. As a result,
the test suite changes a little to cope with the new semantics of
_do_accept() and _do_connect().
Lastly, take some pieces of the now-deleted docstrings and move
them up to the public interface level. They were a little more detailed,
and it won't hurt to keep them.
Signed-off-by: John Snow <jsnow@redhat.com>
Acked-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Daniel P. Berrangé <berrange@redhat.com>
Message-id: 20220225205948.3693480-4-jsnow@redhat.com
Signed-off-by: John Snow <jsnow@redhat.com>
Previously, I had a method named "accept()" that under-the-hood calls
bind(2), listen(2) *and* accept(2). I meant this as a simplification and
counterpart to the one-shot "connect()" method.
This is confusing to readers who expect accept() to mean *just*
accept(2). Since I need to split apart the "accept()" method into
multiple methods anyway (one of which strongly resembling accept(2)), it
feels pertinent to rename this method *now*.
Rename this all-in-one method "start_server_and_accept()" instead.
Signed-off-by: John Snow <jsnow@redhat.com>
Acked-by: Kevin Wolf <kwolf@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Daniel P. Berrangé <berrange@redhat.com>
Message-id: 20220225205948.3693480-3-jsnow@redhat.com
Signed-off-by: John Snow <jsnow@redhat.com>
Tests a real connect, a real accept, and really sending and receiving a
message over a UNIX socket.
Brings coverage of protocol.py up to ~93%.
Signed-off-by: John Snow <jsnow@redhat.com>
Message-id: 20210915162955.333025-27-jsnow@redhat.com
Signed-off-by: John Snow <jsnow@redhat.com>
This tests most of protocol.py -- From a hacked up Coverage.py run, it's
at about 86%. There's a few error cases that aren't very well tested
yet, they're hard to induce artificially so far. I'm working on it.
Signed-off-by: John Snow <jsnow@redhat.com>
Message-id: 20210915162955.333025-26-jsnow@redhat.com
Signed-off-by: John Snow <jsnow@redhat.com>
