Some tor relays would report lines like these in their extrainfo
documents:
dirreq-write-history 2011-03-14 16:46:44 (900 s)
This was confusing to some people who look at the stats. It would happen
whenever a relay first starts up, or when a relay has dirport disabled.
Change this so that lines without actual bw entries are omitted.
Implements ticket 2497.
While doing so, get rid of the now unnecessary function
control_signal_act().
Fixes bug 2917, reported by Robert Ransom. Bugfix on commit
9b4aa8d2ab. This patch is loosely based on
a patch by Robert (Changelog entry).
- Document the structure and variables.
- Make circuits_for_buffer_stats into a static variable.
- Don't die horribly if interval_length is 0.
- Remove the unused local_circ_id field.
- Reorder the fields of circ_buffer_stats_t for cleaner alignment layout.
Instead of answering GETINFO requests about our geoip usage only after
running for 24 hours, this patch makes us answer GETINFO requests
immediately. We still round and quantize as before.
Implements bug2711.
Also, refactor the heck out of the bridge usage formatting code. No
longer should we need to do a generate-parse-and-regenerate cycle to
get the controller string, and that lets us simplify the code a lot.
We've got millisecond timers now, we might as well use them.
This change won't actually make circuits get expiered with microsecond
precision, since we only call the expiry functions once per second.
Still, it should avoid the situation where we have a circuit get
expired too early because of rounding.
A couple of the expiry functions now call tor_gettimeofday: this
should be cheap since we're only doing it once per second. If it gets
to be called more often, though, we should onsider having the current
time be an argument again.
Since svn r1475/git 5b6099e8 in tor-0.0.6, we have responded to an
exhaustion of all 65535 stream IDs on a circuit by marking that
circuit for close. That's not the right response. Instead, we
should mark the circuit as "too dirty for new circuits".
Of course in reality this isn't really right either. If somebody
has managed to cram 65535 streams onto a circuit, the circuit is
probably not going to work well for any of those streams, so maybe
we should be limiting the number of streams on an origin circuit
concurrently.
Also, closing the stream in this case is probably the wrong thing to
do as well, but fixing that can also wait.
We fixed bug 539 (where directories would say "503" but send data
anyway) back in 0.2.0.16-alpha/0.1.2.19. Because most directory
versions were affected, we added workaround to make sure that we
examined the contents of 503-replies to make sure there wasn't any
data for them to find. But now that such routers are nonexistent,
we can remove this code. (Even if somebody fired up an 0.1.2.19
directory cache today, it would still be fine to ignore data in its
erroneous 503 replies.)
The first was genuinely impossible, I think: it could only happen
when the amount we read differed from the amount we wanted to read
by more than INT_MAX.
The second is just very unlikely: it would give incorrect results to
the controller if you somehow wrote or read more than 4GB on one
edge conn in one second. That one is a bugfix on 0.1.2.8-beta.
In afe414 (tor-0.1.0.1-rc~173), when we moved to
connection_edge_end_errno(), we used it in handling errors from
connection_connect(). That's not so good, since by the time
connection_connect() returns, the socket is no longer set, and we're
supposed to be looking at the socket_errno return value from
connection_connect() instead. So do what we should've done, and
look at the socket_errno value that we get from connection_connect().
