uasyncio: StreamReader: Separate "poll socket" vs "I/O socket". #227
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Poll socket is what's passed to uselect.poll(), while I/O socket is what's used for .read(). This is a workaround of the issue that MicroPython doesn't support proxying poll functionality for stream wrappers (like SSL, websocket, etc.) This issue is tracked as micropython/micropython#3394 It may be that it's more efficient to apply such a workaround on uasyncio level rather than implementing full solution of uPy side.
pfalcon
added a commit
to pfalcon/pycopy-lib
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 3, 2017
Q #1: Should this be in uasyncio package at all? Upstream doesn't have this. Pro: will be easier for people do discover (see e.g. micropython/micropython-lib#148) Q #2: This provides implements 2 ways to create a WS connections: 1) using start_ws_server(); 2) using wrapping existing StreamReader and StreamWriter. History: initial prototype of course used 2). But the idea was "it should be like the official start_server()!!1". But then I though how to integrate it e.g. with Picoweb, and became clear that 2) is the most flixble way. So, 1) is intended to be removed. Q #3: Uses native websocket module for read path, but has own write path due to micropython/micropython#3396 Q #4: Requires micropython/micropython-lib#227 due to micropython/micropython#3394 .
|
Merged. |
pfalcon
added a commit
to pfalcon/pycopy-lib
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 1, 2018
During development, following questions were posed, and subsequently, answered: Q #1: Should this be in uasyncio package at all? Upstream doesn't have this. Pro: will be easier for people do discover (see e.g. micropython/micropython-lib#148) A: uasyncio diverges more and more from asyncio, so if something is convinient for uasyncio, there's no need to look back at asyncio. Q #2: This provides implements 2 ways to create a WS connections: 1) using start_ws_server(); 2) using wrapping existing StreamReader and StreamWriter. History: initial prototype of course used 2). But the idea was "it should be like the official start_server()!!1". But then I though how to integrate it e.g. with Picoweb, and became clear that 2) is the most flixble way. So, 1) is intended to be removed. A: 1) was removed and is not part of the merged version of the patch. Q #3: Uses native websocket module for read path, but has own write path due to micropython/micropython#3396 A: So far, so good. Q #4: Requires micropython/micropython-lib#227 due to micropython/micropython#3394 . A: The prerequisite was merged.
pfalcon
added a commit
to pfalcon/pycopy-lib
that referenced
this pull request
May 3, 2020
During development, following questions were posed, and subsequently, answered: Q #1: Should this be in uasyncio package at all? Upstream doesn't have this. Pro: will be easier for people do discover (see e.g. micropython/micropython-lib#148) A: uasyncio diverges more and more from asyncio, so if something is convinient for uasyncio, there's no need to look back at asyncio. Q #2: This provides implements 2 ways to create a WS connections: 1) using start_ws_server(); 2) using wrapping existing StreamReader and StreamWriter. History: initial prototype of course used 2). But the idea was "it should be like the official start_server()!!1". But then I though how to integrate it e.g. with Picoweb, and became clear that 2) is the most flixble way. So, 1) is intended to be removed. A: 1) was removed and is not part of the merged version of the patch. Q #3: Uses native websocket module for read path, but has own write path due to micropython/micropython#3396 A: So far, so good. Q #4: Requires micropython/micropython-lib#227 due to micropython/micropython#3394 . A: The prerequisite was merged.
pfalcon
added a commit
to pfalcon/pycopy-lib
that referenced
this pull request
May 3, 2020
During development, following questions were posed, and subsequently, answered: Q #1: Should this be in uasyncio package at all? Upstream doesn't have this. Pro: will be easier for people do discover (see e.g. micropython/micropython-lib#148) A: uasyncio diverges more and more from asyncio, so if something is convinient for uasyncio, there's no need to look back at asyncio. Q #2: This provides implements 2 ways to create a WS connections: 1) using start_ws_server(); 2) using wrapping existing StreamReader and StreamWriter. History: initial prototype of course used 2). But the idea was "it should be like the official start_server()!!1". But then I though how to integrate it e.g. with Picoweb, and became clear that 2) is the most flixble way. So, 1) is intended to be removed. A: 1) was removed and is not part of the merged version of the patch. Q #3: Uses native websocket module for read path, but has own write path due to micropython/micropython#3396 A: So far, so good. Q #4: Requires micropython/micropython-lib#227 due to micropython/micropython#3394 . A: The prerequisite was merged.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Poll socket is what's passed to uselect.poll(), while I/O socket is what's
used for .read(). This is a workaround of the issue that MicroPython doesn't
support proxying poll functionality for stream wrappers (like SSL, websocket,
etc.)
This issue is tracked as micropython/micropython#3394
It may be that it's more efficient to apply such a workaround on uasyncio
level rather than implementing full solution of uPy side.