16 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Nick Mathewson
598d133609 Try to clear up more size_t vs int/long issues. 2010-10-27 22:57:53 -04:00
Nick Mathewson
2cbb1a161e Make rate-limits go up to SIZE_MAX/EV_SSIZE_MAX, not just INT32_MAX
Someday, when networks are far faster and people frequently want a
burst value greater than 2GB per tick, this will seem very forsightful
indeed.

For now, it breaks ABI, but not source.  Fixes bug 3092096.
2010-10-26 10:27:29 -04:00
Nick Mathewson
34d64f8a34 Fix serious bugs in per-bufferevent rate-limiting code
Our old code was too zealous about deleting the refill events that
would actually make connections able to read or write again after
they had run out of bandwidth.  Under some circumstances, this could
cause a bufferevent to never actually refill one of its
rate-limiting buckets.

Also, the code treated setting a per-connection rate-limit on a
connection that already had a group-limit as if it were changing the
limit on a connection whose allocation had already run out.

This patch fixes both of those problems.
2010-10-12 13:54:07 -04:00
Nick Mathewson
9c8db0f804 Fix all warnings in the main codebase flagged by -Wsigned-compare
Remember, the code
   int is_less_than(int a, unsigned b) {
      return a < b;
   }
is buggy, since the C integer promotion rules basically turn it into
   int is_less_than(int a, unsigned b) {
      return ((unsigned)a) < b;
   }
and we really want something closer to
   int is_less_than(int a, unsigned b) {
      return a < 0 || ((unsigned)a) < b;
   }
.

Suggested by an example from Ralph Castain
2010-09-23 22:45:55 -04:00
Nick Mathewson
0bffe43a15 Fix a nasty dangling-event bug when using rate-limiting groups
When we freed a bufferevent that was in a rate-limiting group and
blocked on IO, the process of freeing it caused it to get removed
from the group.  But removing the bufferevent from the group made
its limits get removed, which could make it get un-suspended and in
turn cause its events to get re-added.  Since we would then
immediately _free_ the events, this would result in dangling
pointers.

Fixes bug 3041007.
2010-08-09 12:08:40 -04:00
Nick Mathewson
6ae53d6762 Add an interface to expose min_share in ratelimiting groups 2010-08-04 15:44:08 -04:00
Nick Mathewson
085987093f never let bufferevent_rlim functions return negative 2010-07-05 12:26:21 -04:00
Nick Mathewson
fb366c1d88 Functions to track the total bytes sent over a rate limit group. 2010-03-21 13:16:31 -04:00
Nick Mathewson
ee41aca63e Functions to manipulate existing rate limiting groups.
This patch adds a function to change the current rate limit of a rate
limiting group, and another to free an empty rate limiting group.
2010-03-12 00:47:39 -05:00
Nick Mathewson
17efc1cdfa Update all our copyright notices to say "2010" 2010-03-04 01:38:48 -05:00
Nick Mathewson
162ce8a856 Expose view of current rate limit as constrained by group limit 2010-02-23 00:38:30 -05:00
Nick Mathewson
e5bbd40ad7 Clean up formatting: use tabs, not 8-spaces, to indent. 2010-02-18 17:44:09 -05:00
Nick Mathewson
85047a6983 Functions to view and manipulate rate-limiting buckets.
We need these for Tor, and other projects probably need them too.  Uses
include:
    - Checking whether bandwidth is mostly-used, and only taking some
      actions when there's plenty of bandwidth.
    - Deducting some non-bufferevent activities from a rate-limit group.
2010-02-03 15:12:04 -05:00
Nick Mathewson
ff3f6cd42b Check more internal event_add() calls for failure
Most of these should be unable to fail, since adding a timeout
generally always works.  Still, it's better not to try to be "too
smart for our own good here."

There are some remaining event_add() calls that I didn't add checks
for; I've marked those with "XXXX" comments.
2010-01-22 16:14:49 -05:00
Nick Mathewson
165d30e31a Fix compilation of rate-limiting code on win32. 2009-12-30 14:29:56 -05:00
Nick Mathewson
737c9cd87b Rate-limiting for bufferevents; group and individual limits are supported.
The fairness algorithms are not the best, not every bufferevent type
is supported, and some of the locking tricks here are simply absurd.
Still, this code should be a good first step.
2009-12-28 16:11:18 -05:00