Need an example using dht_put_item with libtorrent - c++

I'm trying to use dht to keep mutable data with libtorrent. As far as I can understand, the right way is to use the method dht_put_item from session. The problem is that I need to pass a callback function and I don't know what I'm doing wrong... my code looks like the following
namespace lt = libtorrent;
//The callback function
void cb(lt::entry& cdentry, boost::array<char,64>& cbarray, boost::uint64_t& cbint, std::string const& cbstring){
//My stuff here
}
void main(){
//The session
lt::session ses;
//The data I want to insert into DHT
std::string cadenaStr = "519d818411de49652b4aaf34850321de28bb2dce";
//Now I create the keys
unsigned char seed[32];
unsigned char public_key[32];
unsigned char private_key[64];
unsigned char signature[32];
ed25519_create_seed(seed);
ed25519_create_keypair(public_key, private_key, seed);
ed25519_sign(signature, cadenaStr.c_str(), sizeof(cadenaStr.c_str()), public_key, private_key);
//How can I use this?, where is the data supposed to go? :|
ses.dht_put_item(public_key, cb, false);
}
On libtorrent/session_handler.hpp this method is defined as
void dht_put_item(boost::array<char, 32> key
, boost::function<void(entry&, boost::array<char,64>&
, boost::uint64_t&, std::string const&)> cb
, std::string salt = std::string());
Can someone please tell me what I'm doing wrong.
Thanks!

There is an example in the libtorrent repository that I use for testing. It can generate keys, put and get both mutable and immutable items.
https://github.com/arvidn/libtorrent/blob/master/tools/dht_put.cpp
How can I use this?, where is the data supposed to go? :|
You provide the data in the callback that's called. The reason for this kind of API is that there are use cases where you want to mutate the data, and then you need to first know whether something is already stored under this key, and what it is.

You are missing the settings pack for your session.
lt::settings_pack settings;
settings.set_bool(settings_pack::enable_dht, false);
settings.set_int(settings_pack::alert_mask, 0xffffffff);
ses.apply_settings(settings);
settings.set_bool(settings_pack::enable_dht, true);
ses.apply_settings(settings);
Then you need to wait until you receive a boostrap message by waiting for an alert.
wait_for_alert(ses, dht_bootstrap_alert::alert_type);
Last, your dht_put_item call:
char const* cadenaStr = "519d818411de49652b4aaf34850321de28bb2dce";
dht_put_item(public_key, std::bind(&put_string, std::placeholders::_1, std::placeholders::_2, std::placeholders::_3, std::placeholders::_4, public_key, private_key, cadenaStr));
You will need these functions:
static alert* wait_for_alert(session* ses, int alert_type)
{
alert* ret = nullptr;
bool found = false;
while (!found)
{
ses->wait_for_alert(seconds(5));
std::vector<alert*> alerts;
ses->pop_alerts(&alerts);
for (std::vector<alert*>::iterator i = alerts.begin()
, end(alerts.end()); i != end; ++i)
{
if ((*i)->type() != alert_type)
{
continue;
}
ret = *i;
found = true;
}
}
return ret;
}
static void put_string(
entry& e
,boost::array<char, 64>& sig
,boost::int64_t& seq
,std::string const& salt
,boost::array<char, 32> const& pk
,boost::array<char, 64> const& sk
,char const* str)
{
using dht::sign_mutable_item;
if (str != NULL) {
e = std::string(str);
std::vector<char> buf;
bencode(std::back_inserter(buf), e);
dht::signature sign;
seq++;
sign = sign_mutable_item(buf, salt, dht::sequence_number(seq)
, dht::public_key(pk.data())
, dht::secret_key(sk.data()));
sig = sign.bytes;
}
}

Related

using a bytes field as proxy for arbitrary messages

Hello nano developers,
I'd like to realize the following proto:
message container {
enum MessageType {
TYPE_UNKNOWN = 0;
evt_resultStatus = 1;
}
required MessageType mt = 1;
optional bytes cmd_evt_transfer = 2;
}
message evt_resultStatus {
required int32 operationMode = 1;
}
...
The dots denote, there are more messages with (multiple) primitive containing datatypes to come. The enum will grow likewise, just wanted to keep it short.
The container gets generated as:
typedef struct _container {
container_MessageType mt;
pb_callback_t cmd_evt_transfer;
} container;
evt_resultStatus is:
typedef struct _evt_resultStatus {
int32_t operationMode;
} evt_resultStatus;
The field cmd_evt_transfer should act as a proxy of subsequent messages like evt_resultStatus holding primitive datatypes.
evt_resultStatus shall be encoded into bytes and be placed into the cmd_evt_transfer field.
Then the container shall get encoded and the encoding result will be used for subsequent transfers.
The background why to do so, is to shorten the proto definition and avoid the oneof thing. Unfortunately syntax version 3 is not fully supported, so we can not make use of any fields.
The first question is: will this approach be possible?
What I've got so far is the encoding including the callback which seems to behave fine. But on the other side, decoding somehow skips the callback. I've read issues here, that this happened also when using oneof and bytes fields.
Can someone please clarify on how to proceed with this?
Sample code so far I got:
bool encode_msg_test(pb_byte_t* buffer, int32_t sval, size_t* sz, char* err) {
evt_resultStatus rs = evt_resultStatus_init_zero;
rs.operationMode = sval;
pb_ostream_t stream = pb_ostream_from_buffer(buffer, sizeof(buffer));
/*encode container*/
container msg = container_init_zero;
msg.mt = container_MessageType_evt_resultStatus;
msg.cmd_evt_transfer.arg = &rs;
msg.cmd_evt_transfer.funcs.encode = encode_cb;
if(! pb_encode(&stream, container_fields, &msg)) {
const char* local_err = PB_GET_ERROR(&stream);
sprintf(err, "pb_encode error: %s", local_err);
return false;
}
*sz = stream.bytes_written;
return true;
}
bool encode_cb(pb_ostream_t *stream, const pb_field_t *field, void * const *arg) {
evt_resultStatus* rs = (evt_resultStatus*)(*arg);
//with the below in place a stream full error rises
// if (! pb_encode_tag_for_field(stream, field)) {
// return false;
// }
if(! pb_encode(stream, evt_resultStatus_fields, rs)) {
return false;
}
return true;
}
//buffer holds previously encoded data
bool decode_msg_test(pb_byte_t* buffer, int32_t* sval, size_t msg_len, char* err) {
container msg = container_init_zero;
evt_resultStatus res = evt_resultStatus_init_zero;
msg.cmd_evt_transfer.arg = &res;
msg.cmd_evt_transfer.funcs.decode = decode_cb;
pb_istream_t stream = pb_istream_from_buffer(buffer, msg_len);
if(! pb_decode(&stream, container_fields, &msg)) {
const char* local_err = PB_GET_ERROR(&stream);
sprintf(err, "pb_encode error: %s", local_err);
return false;
}
*sval = res.operationMode;
return true;
}
bool decode_cb(pb_istream_t *istream, const pb_field_t *field, void **arg) {
evt_resultStatus * rs = (evt_resultStatus*)(*arg);
if(! pb_decode(istream, evt_resultStatus_fields, rs)) {
return false;
}
return true;
}
I feel, I don't have a proper understanding of the encoding / decoding process.
Is it correct to assume:
the first call of pb_encode (in encode_msg_test) takes care of the mt field
the second call of pb_encode (in encode_cb) handles the cmd_evt_transfer field
If I do:
bool encode_cb(pb_ostream_t *stream, const pb_field_t *field, void * const *arg) {
evt_resultStatus* rs = (evt_resultStatus*)(*arg);
if (! pb_encode_tag_for_field(stream, field)) {
return false;
}
if(! pb_encode(stream, evt_resultStatus_fields, rs)) {
return false;
}
return true;
}
then I get a stream full error on the call of pb_encode.
Why is that?
Yes, the approach is reasonable. Nanopb callbacks do not care what the actual data read or written by the callback is.
As for why your decode callback is not working, you'll need to post the code you are using for decoding.
(As an aside, Any type does work in nanopb and is covered by this test case. But the type_url included in all Any messages makes them have a quite large overhead.)

Finding Key in std::unordered_map with custom key

I'm currently creating a custom std::unordered_map declaration with my custom key:
class BASE_DLLSPEC ClientKey
{
private:
// this is always true initially until we call SetClientId
bool emptyId;
// both of these are guaranteed to be unique
QString m_connectId; // ip:port format
QString m_clientId; // {Uuid} format
// ----------
public:
ClientKey(const QString& connectId = "", const QString& clientId = "") :
emptyId(true), m_connectId(connectId), m_clientId(clientId)
{ }
void SetClientId(const QString& clientId)
{
m_clientId = clientId;
emptyId = false;
}
const QString& GetConnectId() const { return m_connectId; }
const QString& GetClientId() const { return m_clientId; }
bool operator==(const ClientKey& other) const
{
int comp1 = QString::compare(m_connectId, other.GetConnectId());
int comp2 = QString::compare(m_clientId, other.GetClientId());
return (comp1 == 0) ||
(!emptyId && comp2 == 0);
}
};
struct BASE_DLLSPEC ClientKeyHash
{
std::size_t operator()(const ClientKey& key) const
{
std::string connectId = key.GetConnectId().toStdString();
std::string clientId = key.GetClientId().toStdString();
std::size_t h1 = std::hash<std::string>()(connectId);
std::size_t h2 = std::hash<std::string>()(clientId);
return h1 ^ (h2 << 1);
}
};
struct BASE_DLLSPEC ClientKeyEqual
{
bool operator()(const ClientKey& lhs, const ClientKey& rhs) const
{
return lhs == rhs;
}
};
typedef std::unordered_map<ClientKey,
ClientPtr,
ClientKeyHash,
ClientKeyEqual> ClientMap;
I'm having difficulties finding a particular key during my iteration. For some reason my client object is never located when I pass in a key for lookup.
ClientKey key = Manager::ClientKey(connectId);
ClientManager& clientManager = Manager::ClientManager::GetInstance();
ClientMap::const_iterator clientIter = clientManager.GetClients().find(key);
Even if the key has already been inserted, clientIter is always pointing to the end iterator position. Do you think this is related to having to re-create these ClientKey values on the stack and then passing them into the map for look-up, or do I have a problem elsewhere? Thank you for the clarification and insight.
At first, some considerations to the emptyId field (do not consider invalid formats - which, by the way, is not checked by you either):
ClientKey k0("hello", "world");
ClientKey k1("hello");
k1.SetClientId("world");
Is there any particular reason that the emtpyId flag should be different for k0 and k1? I personally would say:
The flag is implemented incorrectly.
It is redundant, you get the same information via m_clientId.empty().
Now the reason for failure:
Consider again k0 and k1, but without SetClientId having been called on k1:
ClientKey k0("hello", "world");
ClientKey k1("hello");
Imagine k0 has been inserted in the map, and with k1 you try to find it. What will happen? k1 produces another hash key than k0, and the map will look at a different bucket than where k0 resides at - and will not find anything.
What I think you want to achieve is having several clients for the same connection id and being able to iterate over these for a given connection id. So you might prefer std::unordered_multimap<std::string, ClientPtr> (where the string parameter represents the connection id). You will get all clients for a given connection id via equal_range then, and your class ClientKey gets obsolete.
Your code allows that the following will return true:
ClientKey k1("hello", "world");
ClientKey k2("hello", "");
return k1 == k2;
However, your hash is based on the combination of connectId and clientId.
unordered_map::find does not do an exhaustive search of the map, instead it looks in the bucket for the given hash and compares just the entries in the bucket.
You are generating your test key with just connectId, so it is looking in the bucket for ClientKey(connectId, "") rather than the bucket for ClientKey(connectId, someOtherValue).
You should consider making the hash based exclusively on connectId.
Lastly, note your constructor:
ClientKey(const QString& connectId = "", const QString& clientId = "") :
emptyId(true), m_connectId(connectId), m_clientId(clientId)
{ }
If I write:
ClientKey ck("hello");
should emptyId really be true?

C++ How to use less conditional statements?

For my assignment, I'm storing user login infos. I'm taking in a string which is the command. The command can be create, login, remove, etc. There are 10 total options, i.e 10 different strings possible. Can anyone explain a more efficient way to write this instead of 10 if and else if statements? Basically how should I format/structure things besides using a bunch of if (string == "one"), else if (string == "two"). Thank you
I expect that your lecturer would like you to extract function to another re-usable function:
string action;
command = CreateAction(action);
command.Do(...);
Ofcourse, inside you CreateAction class you still need to have the conditionals that determine which commands need to be created.
AbstractCommand CreateAction(action)
{
if (action == "login")
return LoginCommand();
else if (action == "remove")
return RemoveCommand();
..... etc etc
}
And if you really want to get rid of all the conditionals than you can create some self-registering commands but that involves a lot more code and classes......
You should look up things like Command Pattern and Factory Pattern
You can use function pointers and a lookup table.
typedef void (*Function_Pointer)(void);
void Create(void);
void Login(void);
void Remove(void);
struct Function_Option_Entry
{
const char * option_text;
Function_Pointer p_function;
};
Function_Option_Entry option_table[] =
{
{"one", Create},
{"two", Login},
{"three", Remove},
};
const unsigned int option_table_size =
sizeof(option_table) / sizeof(option_table[0]);
//...
std::string option_text;
//...
for (i = 0; i < option_table_size; ++i)
{
if (option_text == option_table[i].option_text)
{
option_table[i].p_function();
break;
}
}
Use a switch, and a simple hash-function.
You need to use a hash-function, because C and C++ only allow switching on integral values.
template<size_t N> constexpr char myhash(const char &x[N]) { return x[0] ^ (x[1]+63); }
char myhash(const string& x) { return x.size() ? x[0] ^ (x[1]+63) : 0; }
switch(myhash(s)) {
case myhash("one"):
if(s != "one") goto nomatch;
// do things
break;
case myhash("two"):
if(s != "two") goto nomatch;
// do things
break;
default:
nomatch:
// No match
}
Slight adjustments are needed if you are not using std::string.
I would recommend you to create a function for every specific string. For example, if you receive a string "create" you will call function doCreate(), if you receive a string "login" then you call function doLogin()
The only restriction on these function is that all of them must have the same signature. In an example above it was smh like this:
typedef void (*func_t) ();
The idea is to create a std::map from strings to these functions. So you wouldn't have to write 10 if's or so because you will be able to simple choose the right function from the map by the name of a specific string name. Let me explain it by the means of a small example:
typedef void (*func_t) ();
void doCreate()
{
std::cout << "Create function called!\n";
}
void doLogin()
{
std::cout << "Login function called!\n";
}
std::map<std::string, func_t> functionMap;
void initMap()
{
functionMap["create"] = doCreate;
functionMap["login"] = doLogin;
}
int main()
{
initMap();
std::string str = "login";
functionMap[str](); // will call doLogin()
str = "create";
functionMap[str](); // will call doCreate()
std::string userStr;
// let's now assume that we also can receive a string not from our set of functions
std::cin >> userStr;
if (functionMap.count(userStr))
{
functionMap[str](); // now we call doCreate() or doLogin()
}
else
{
std::cout << "Unknown command\n";
}
return 0;
}
I hope it will help you in someway=)
You can use a map which does the comparison for you.
Something like this:
Initialise map:
std::map<std::string, std::function<void(std::string&)>> map;
map["login"] = std::bind(&Class::DoLogin, this, std::placeholders::_1);
map["create"] = std::bind(&Class::DoCreate, this, std::placeholders::_1);
Receive message:
map.at(rx.msg_type)(rx.msg_data);
Handler:
void Class::DoLogin(const std::string& data)
{
// do login
}
Maybe you can create a std::map<std::string, int> and use map lookups to get the code of the command that was passed - you can later switch on that number. Or create an enum Command and have a std::map<std::string, Command> and use the switch.
Example:
enum Command
{
CREATE,
LOGIN,
...
};
std::map<std::string, Command> commandNameToCode;
// fill the map with appropriate values
commandNameToCode["create"] = Command::CREATE;
// somehow get command name from user and store in the below variable (not shown)
std::string input;
// check if the command is in the map and if so, act accordingly
if(commandNameToCode.find(input) != commandNameToCode.end())
{
switch(commandNameToCode[input])
{
case CREATE:
// handle create
break;
...
}
}

How to encrypt and decrypt a const char* in WinRT

I have been trying to write encrypt and decrypt functions whose signatures require the input and the output strings to be void* type only. The code works fine if the inputs can be specified as IBuffer^ but in the other case the source string and the encrypted->decrypted string do not match.
CodeIBuffer^ byteArrayToIBufferPtr(byte *source, int size)
{
Platform::ArrayReference<uint8> blobArray(source, size);
IBuffer ^buffer = CryptographicBuffer::CreateFromByteArray(blobArray);
return buffer;
}
byte* IBufferPtrToByteArray(IBuffer ^buffer)
{
Array<unsigned char,1U> ^platArray = ref new Array<unsigned char,1U>(256);
CryptographicBuffer::CopyToByteArray(buffer,&platArray);
byte *dest = platArray->Data;
return dest;
}
int DataEncryption::encryptData(EncryptionAlgorithm algo, int keySize, void* srcData, const unsigned int srcSize,
void*& encData, unsigned int& encSize)
{
LOG_D(TAG, "encryptData()");
if(srcData == nullptr)
{
LOG_E(TAG,"");
return DataEncryption::RESULT_EMPTY_DATA_ERROR;
}
if(srcSize == 0)
{
LOG_E(TAG,"");
return DataEncryption::RESULT_SIZE_ZERO_ERROR;
}
IBuffer^ encrypted;
IBuffer^ buffer;
IBuffer^ iv = nullptr;
String^ algName;
bool cbc = false;
switch (algo)
{
case DataEncryption::ENC_DEFAULT:
algName = "AES_CBC";
cbc = true;
break;
default:
break;
}
// Open the algorithm provider for the algorithm specified on input.
SymmetricKeyAlgorithmProvider^ Algorithm = SymmetricKeyAlgorithmProvider::OpenAlgorithm(algName);
// Generate a symmetric key.
IBuffer^ keymaterial = CryptographicBuffer::GenerateRandom((keySize + 7) / 8);
CryptographicKey^ key;
try
{
key = Algorithm->CreateSymmetricKey(keymaterial);
}
catch(InvalidArgumentException^ e)
{
LOG_E(TAG,"encryptData(): Could not create key.");
return DataEncryption::RESULT_ERROR;
}
// CBC mode needs Initialization vector, here just random data.
// IV property will be set on "Encrypted".
if (cbc)
iv = CryptographicBuffer::GenerateRandom(Algorithm->BlockLength);
// Set the data to encrypt.
IBuffer ^srcDataBuffer = byteArrayToIBufferPtr(static_cast<byte*>(srcData),256);
// Encrypt and create an authenticated tag.
encrypted = CryptographicEngine::Encrypt(key, srcDataBuffer, iv);
//encData = encrypted;
byte *bb = IBufferPtrToByteArray(encrypted);
encData = IBufferPtrToByteArray(encrypted);
encSize = encrypted->Length;
return DataEncryption::RESULT_SUCCESS;
}
int DataEncryption::decryptData(EncryptionAlgorithm algo, int keySize, void* encData, const unsigned int encSize,
void*& decData, unsigned int& decSize)
{
LOG_D(TAG, "decryptData()");
if(encData == nullptr)
{
LOG_E(TAG,"");
return DataEncryption::RESULT_EMPTY_DATA_ERROR;
}
if(encSize == 0)
{
LOG_E(TAG,"");
return DataEncryption::RESULT_SIZE_ZERO_ERROR;
}
IBuffer^ encrypted;
IBuffer^ decrypted;
IBuffer^ iv = nullptr;
String^ algName;
bool cbc = false;
switch (algo)
{
case DataEncryption::ENC_DEFAULT:
algName = "AES_CBC";
cbc = true;
break;
default:
break;
}
// Open the algorithm provider for the algorithm specified on input.
SymmetricKeyAlgorithmProvider^ Algorithm = SymmetricKeyAlgorithmProvider::OpenAlgorithm(algName);
// Generate a symmetric key.
IBuffer^ keymaterial = CryptographicBuffer::GenerateRandom((keySize + 7) / 8);
CryptographicKey^ key;
try
{
key = Algorithm->CreateSymmetricKey(keymaterial);
}
catch(InvalidArgumentException^ e)
{
LOG_E(TAG,"encryptData(): Could not create key.");
return DataEncryption::RESULT_ERROR;
}
// CBC mode needs Initialization vector, here just random data.
// IV property will be set on "Encrypted".
if (cbc)
iv = CryptographicBuffer::GenerateRandom(Algorithm->BlockLength);
// Set the data to decrypt.
byte *cc = static_cast<byte*>(encData);
IBuffer ^encDataBuffer = byteArrayToIBufferPtr(cc,256);
// Decrypt and verify the authenticated tag.
decrypted = CryptographicEngine::Decrypt(key, encDataBuffer, iv);
byte *bb = IBufferPtrToByteArray(decrypted);
decData = IBufferPtrToByteArray(decrypted);
decSize = decrypted->Length;
return DataEncryption::RESULT_SUCCESS;
}
I'm guessing that the problem is with this function:
byte* IBufferPtrToByteArray(IBuffer ^buffer)
{
Array<unsigned char,1U> ^platArray = ref new Array<unsigned char,1U>(256);
CryptographicBuffer::CopyToByteArray(buffer,&platArray);
byte *dest = platArray->Data;
return dest;
}
What you're doing there is allocating a new Platform::Array<byte>^ with 1 reference, then getting a pointer to its internally-managed storage, then returning that pointer-- at which point the Array is being dereferenced and is thus deallocating its underlying storage. Thus the pointer you return refers to freed memory. The next allocation is likely to overwrite those bytes.
What you'll need to do is take the return-by-reference Array<byte>^ from CopyToByteArray() (which creates a new Array, presumably wrapping the bytes of the input IBuffer^, and returns it) and copy that array's contents.
Your end result will function similarly to this snippet from the Readium SDK project, which takes a std::string instance, hashes it using SHA-1, and copies the hash data into a member variable uint8_t _key[KeySize]:
using namespace ::Platform;
using namespace ::Windows::Foundation::Cryptography;
using namespace ::Windows::Foundation::Cryptography::Core;
auto byteArray = ArrayReference<byte>(reinterpret_cast<byte*>(const_cast<char*>(str.data())), str.length());
auto inBuf = CryptographicBuffer::CreateFromByteArray(byteArray);
auto keyBuf = HashAlgorithmProvider::OpenAlgorithm(HashAlgorithmNames::Sha1)->HashData(inBuf);
Array<byte>^ outArray = nullptr;
CryptographicBuffer::CopyToByteArray(keyBuf, &outArray);
memcpy_s(_key, KeySize, outArray->Data, outArray->Length);
The steps:
Create an ArrayReference<byte> corresponding to the bytes in the std::string (no copying).
Pass that to CryptographicBuffer::CreateFromByteArray() to get your IBuffer^. Still no copying of data.
Call your hash/encryption function, passing the IBuffer^ you just made. You get another IBuffer^ in return, which may or may not be using the exact same storage (that's really up to the implementation of the algorithm, I think).
Create a variable of type Array<byte>^. Don't allocate an object, you're going to be given one by reference.
Pass the address of that object into CryptographicBuffer::CopyToByteArray() to receive a copy of your key data.
While that Array^ remains valid, copy its bytes into your native array.

how to create a php extension for an object?

I am working on a php extension for c++ classes. How to create a link to a method that accepts as parameter an object of a class?
Can you give me some examples?
THX. APPRECIATE!
I succedded to create a link to a method that accepts as parameter a string or int. But I don't know how to do this for a method.
Here is a short example:
PHP_METHOD(Class1, method_string)
{
Class1 *access;
char *strr=NULL;
int strr_len;
if (zend_parse_parameters(ZEND_NUM_ARGS() TSRMLS_CC, "s", &strr, &strr_len) == FAILURE) {
RETURN_NULL();
}
access_object *obj = (access_object *)zend_object_store_get_object(
getThis() TSRMLS_CC);
access = obj->access;
if (access != NULL) {
std::string s(strr);
RETURN_BOOL(access->method_string(s));
}
}
Use the zend API zend_parse_method_parameters():
ZEND_METHOD(ext_access_class, do_something)
{
zval* objid_this = NULL, objid1 = NULL;
// note: ext_access_class_entry and ext_param_class_entry are of type zend_class_entry*
if (zend_parse_method_parameters(ZEND_NUM_ARGS() TSRMLS_CC, getThis(), "OO", &objid_this, ext_access_class_entry, &objid1, ext_param_class_entry) == FAILURE)
RETURN_NULL();
ext_access_class* const access_obj = (ext_access_class*) zend_object_store_get_object(objid_this TSRMLS_CC);
Class1* const access = access_obj->access;
ext_param_class* const param_obj = (ext_param_class*) zend_object_store_get_object(objid1 TSRMLS_CC);
Class2* const myobject = param_obj->myobject;
const bool ret = access->do_something(myobject);
RETURN_BOOL(ret);
}
I believe ZEND_API int zend_parse_method_parameters(int num_args TSRMLS_DC, zval *this_ptr, char *type_spec, ...); AND
ZEND_API int zend_parse_method_parameters_ex(int flags, int num_args TSRMLS_DC, zval *this_ptr, char *type_spec, ...); are the right API for retrieving the input parameters in the method.
I think the same API will help you accept an object as an input parameter.