-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 7
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Instead of using Lwt.async
+ Lwt_mvar
when receiving UDP
datagram, use an Lwt_stream.t
#4
Comments
Hello @rand00, I am an Outreachy applicant. I would Like to work on this issue. |
Hi @prernadabi23 - welcome to the project, that would be great (: |
Thank you @rand00, |
Have you already tried to compile So it's a couple of changes, but the primary one is indeed what you said. If you start to change this type of the |
Btw. when you want to iterate quickly on compiling a MirageOS unikernel, it's useful not to run mirage build -f mirage/config.ml |
Is it possible to compile it in Windows or will I have to use Ubuntu/Linux? |
We've had some discussion these days about how to do it on Windows, as many Outreachy applicants use that. I think the easiest solution will be if you install Ubuntu via Windows Subsystem for Linux (WSL). There is a guide here |
As you havn't installed |
This line is currently made
async
, to avoid the S.UDP.listen callback to block when theconntest
protocol is slower thanUDP
datagrams can be received. If anLwt_stream
was used instead of anLwt_mvar
, there would be no need for this.As the protocol has an acknowledge mechanism (done each n packets), this stream will be guaranteed not to grow in size indefinately. This just allows the
conntest
protocol to run a bit out of sync from whenUDP
datagrams are received.Switch out these types for the
sink
field in theUdp_flow.t
typeThe text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: