summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorThomas Schwinge <tschwinge@gnu.org>2012-12-11 11:04:26 +0100
committerThomas Schwinge <tschwinge@gnu.org>2012-12-11 11:04:26 +0100
commitbcfc058a332da0a2bd2e09e13619be3e2eb803a7 (patch)
tree8cbce5a3d8eb1fc43efae81810da895978ce948e
parent5bd36fdff16871eb7d06fc26cac07e7f2703432b (diff)
IRC.
-rw-r--r--hurd/translator/pfinet/ipv6.mdwn21
-rw-r--r--open_issues/anatomy_of_a_hurd_system.mdwn111
-rw-r--r--open_issues/fakeroot_eagain.mdwn216
-rw-r--r--open_issues/gnumach_memory_management.mdwn49
-rw-r--r--open_issues/libpthread.mdwn92
-rw-r--r--open_issues/netstat.mdwn34
-rw-r--r--open_issues/performance.mdwn103
-rw-r--r--open_issues/robustness.mdwn65
-rw-r--r--open_issues/select.mdwn128
9 files changed, 801 insertions, 18 deletions
diff --git a/hurd/translator/pfinet/ipv6.mdwn b/hurd/translator/pfinet/ipv6.mdwn
index 5afee0c..d30cc85 100644
--- a/hurd/translator/pfinet/ipv6.mdwn
+++ b/hurd/translator/pfinet/ipv6.mdwn
@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-[[!meta copyright="Copyright © 2007, 2008, 2010 Free Software Foundation,
+[[!meta copyright="Copyright © 2007, 2008, 2010, 2012 Free Software Foundation,
Inc."]]
[[!meta license="""[[!toggle id="license" text="GFDL 1.2+"]][[!toggleable
@@ -6,8 +6,8 @@ id="license" text="Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this
document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or
any later version published by the Free Software Foundation; with no Invariant
Sections, no Front-Cover Texts, and no Back-Cover Texts. A copy of the license
-is included in the section entitled
-[[GNU Free Documentation License|/fdl]]."]]"""]]
+is included in the section entitled [[GNU Free Documentation
+License|/fdl]]."]]"""]]
[[Stefan_Siegl|stesie]] has added IPv6 support to the pfinet [[translator]].
This was [Savannah task #5470](http://savannah.gnu.org/task/?5470).
@@ -55,3 +55,18 @@ Quite the same, but with static IPv6 address assignment:
# Missing Functionality
Amongst other things, support for [[IOCTL]]s is missing.
+
+
+## IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2012-12-10
+
+[[!tag open_issue_hurd]]
+
+ <braunr> looks like pfinet -G option doesn't work
+ <braunr> if someone is interested in fixing this (it concerns static IPv6
+ routing)
+ <braunr> youpi: have you ever successfully used pfinet with global
+ statically configured ipv6 addresses ?
+ <youpi> never tried
+ <braunr> ok
+ <braunr> i'd like to set this up on my VMs but it looks bugged :/
+ <braunr> i can't manage to set correctly set the gateway
diff --git a/open_issues/anatomy_of_a_hurd_system.mdwn b/open_issues/anatomy_of_a_hurd_system.mdwn
index 99ef170..3e58587 100644
--- a/open_issues/anatomy_of_a_hurd_system.mdwn
+++ b/open_issues/anatomy_of_a_hurd_system.mdwn
@@ -13,7 +13,10 @@ License|/fdl]]."]]"""]]
A bunch of this should also be covered in other (introductionary) material,
like Bushnell's Hurd paper. All this should be unfied and streamlined.
-IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2011-03-08:
+[[!toc]]
+
+
+# IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2011-03-08
<foocraft> I've a question on what are the "units" in the hurd project, if
you were to divide them into units if they aren't, and what are the
@@ -38,9 +41,8 @@ IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2011-03-08:
<antrik> no
<antrik> servers often depend on other servers for certain functionality
----
-IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2011-03-12:
+# IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2011-03-12
<dEhiN> when mach first starts up, does it have some basic i/o or fs
functionality built into it to start up the initial hurd translators?
@@ -72,24 +74,24 @@ IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2011-03-12:
<antrik> it also does some bootstrapping work during startup, to bring the
rest of the system up
----
+
+# Source Code Documentation
Provide a cross-linked sources documentation, including generated files, like
RPC stubs.
* <http://www.gnu.org/software/global/>
----
-[[Hurd_101]].
+# [[Hurd_101]]
+
----
+# [[hurd/IO_path]]
-More stuff like [[hurd/IO_path]].
+Need more stuff like that.
----
-IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2011-10-18:
+# IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2011-10-18
<frhodes> what happens @ boot. and which translators are started in what
order?
@@ -97,9 +99,8 @@ IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2011-10-18:
ext2; ext2 starts exec; ext2 execs a few other servers; ext2 execs
init. from there on, it's just standard UNIX stuff
----
-IRC, OFTC, #debian-hurd, 2011-11-02:
+# IRC, OFTC, #debian-hurd, 2011-11-02
<sekon_> is __dir_lookup a RPC ??
<sekon_> where can i find the source of __dir_lookup ??
@@ -123,9 +124,8 @@ IRC, OFTC, #debian-hurd, 2011-11-02:
<tschwinge> sekon_: This may help a bit:
http://www.gnu.org/software/hurd/hurd/hurd_hacking_guide.html
----
-IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2012-01-08:
+# IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2012-01-08
<abique> can you tell me how is done in hurd: "ls | grep x" ?
<abique> in bash
@@ -187,7 +187,8 @@ IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2012-01-08:
<antrik> that's probably the most fundamental design feature of the Hurd
<antrik> (all filesystem operations actually, not only lookups)
-IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2012-01-09:
+
+## IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2012-01-09
<braunr> youpi: are you sure cthreads are M:N ? i'm almost sure they're 1:1
<braunr> and no modern OS is a right place for any thread userspace
@@ -266,3 +267,83 @@ IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2012-01-09:
<youpi> they help only when the threads are living
<braunr> ok
<youpi> now as I said I don't have to talk much more, I have to leave :)
+
+
+# IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2012-12-06
+
+ <braunr> spiderweb: have you read
+ http://www.gnu.org/software/hurd/hurd-paper.html ?
+ <spiderweb> I'll have a look.
+ <braunr> and also the beginning of
+ http://ftp.sceen.net/mach/mach_a_new_kernel_foundation_for_unix_development.pdf
+ <braunr> these two should provide a good look at the big picture the hurd
+ attemtps to achieve
+ <Tekk_> I can't help but wonder though, what advantages were really
+ achieved with early mach?
+ <Tekk_> weren't they just running a monolithic unix server like osx does?
+ <braunr> most mach-based systems were
+ <braunr> but thanks to that, they could provide advanced features over
+ other well established unix systems
+ <braunr> while also being compatible
+ <Tekk_> so basically it was just an ease of development thing
+ <braunr> well that's what mach aimed at being
+ <braunr> same for the hurd
+ <braunr> making things easy
+ <Tekk_> but as a side effect hurd actually delivers on the advantages of
+ microkernels aside from that, but the older systems wouldn't, correct?
+ <braunr> that's how there could be network file systems in very short time
+ and very scarce resources (i.e. developers working on it), while on other
+ systems it required a lot more to accomplish that
+ <braunr> no, it's not a side effect of the microkernel
+ <braunr> the hurd retains and extends the concept of flexibility introduced
+ by mach
+ <Tekk_> the improved stability, etc. isn't a side effect of being able to
+ restart generally thought of as system-critical processes?
+ <braunr> no
+ <braunr> you can't restart system critical processes on the hurd either
+ <braunr> that's one feature of minix, and they worked hard on it
+ <Tekk_> ah, okay. so that's currently just the domain of minix
+ <Tekk_> okay
+ <Tekk_> spiderweb: well, there's 1 advantage of minix for you :P
+ <braunr> the main idea of mach is to make it easy to extend unix
+ <braunr> without having hundreds of system calls
+ <braunr> the hurd keeps that and extends it by making many operations
+ unprivileged
+ <braunr> you don't need special code for kernel modules any more
+ <braunr> it's easy
+ <braunr> you don't need special code to handle suid bits and other ugly
+ similar hacks,
+ <braunr> it's easy
+ <braunr> you don't need fuse
+ <braunr> easy
+ <braunr> etc..
+
+
+# IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2012-12-06
+
+ <spiderweb> what is the #1 feature that distinguished hurd from other
+ operating systems. the concept of translators. (will read more when I get
+ more time).
+ <braunr> yes, translators
+ <braunr> using the VFS as a service directory
+ <braunr> and the VFS permissions to control access to those services
+
+
+# IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2012-12-10
+
+ <spiderweb> I want to work on hurd, but I think I'm going to start with
+ minix, I own the minix book 3rd ed. it seems like a good intro to
+ operating systems in general. like I don't even know what a semaphore is
+ yet.
+ <braunr> well, enjoy learning :)
+ <spiderweb> once I finish that book, what reading do you guys recommend?
+ <spiderweb> other than the wiki
+ <braunr> i wouldn't recommend starting with a book that focuses on one
+ operating system anyway
+ <braunr> you tend to think in terms of what is done in that specific
+ implementation and compare everything else to that
+ <braunr> tannenbaum is not only the main author or minix, but also the one
+ of the book http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_Operating_Systems
+ <braunr>
+ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_important_publications_in_computer_science#Operating_systems
+ should be a pretty good list :)
diff --git a/open_issues/fakeroot_eagain.mdwn b/open_issues/fakeroot_eagain.mdwn
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..6b684a0
--- /dev/null
+++ b/open_issues/fakeroot_eagain.mdwn
@@ -0,0 +1,216 @@
+[[!meta copyright="Copyright © 2012 Free Software Foundation, Inc."]]
+
+[[!meta license="""[[!toggle id="license" text="GFDL 1.2+"]][[!toggleable
+id="license" text="Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this
+document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or
+any later version published by the Free Software Foundation; with no Invariant
+Sections, no Front-Cover Texts, and no Back-Cover Texts. A copy of the license
+is included in the section entitled [[GNU Free Documentation
+License|/fdl]]."]]"""]]
+
+[[!tag open_issue_glibc open_issue_porting]]
+
+
+# IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2012-12-05
+
+ <braunr> rbraun 18813 R 2hrs ln -sf ../af_ZA/LC_NUMERIC
+ debian/locales-all/usr/lib/locale/en_BW/LC_NUMERIC
+ <braunr> when building glibc
+ <braunr> is this a known issue ?
+ <tschwinge> braunr: No. Can you get a backtrace?
+ <braunr> tschwinge: with gdb you mean ?
+ <tschwinge> Yes. If you have any debugging symbols (glibc?).
+ <braunr> or the build log leading to that ?
+ <braunr> ok, i will next time i have it
+ <tschwinge> OK.
+ <braunr> (i regularly had it when working on the pthreads port)
+ <braunr> tschwinge:
+ http://www.sceen.net/~rbraun/hurd_glibc_build_deadlock_trace
+ <braunr> youpi: ^
+ <youpi> Mmm, there's not so much we can do about this one
+ <braunr> youpi: what do you mean ?
+ <youpi> the problem is that it's really a reentrency issue of the libc
+ locale
+ <youpi> it would happen just the same on linux
+ <braunr> sure
+ <braunr> but hat doesn't mean we can't report and/or fix it :)
+ <youpi> (the _nl_state_lock)
+ <braunr> do you have any workaround in mind ?
+ <youpi> no
+ <youpi> actually that's what I meant by "there's not so much we can do
+ about this"
+ <braunr> ok
+ <youpi> because it's a bad interaction between libfakeroot and glibc
+ <youpi> glibc believe fxtstat64 would never call locale functions
+ <youpi> but with libfakeroot it does
+ <braunr> i see
+ <youpi> only because we get an EAGAIN here
+ <braunr> but hm, doesn't it happen on linux ?
+ <youpi> EAGAIN doesn't happen on linux for fxstat64, no :)
+ <braunr> why does it happen on the hurd ?
+ <youpi> I mean for fakeroot stuff
+ <youpi> probably because fakeroot uses socket functions
+ <youpi> for which we probably don't properly handleEAGAIN
+ <youpi> I've already seen such kind of issue
+ <youpi> in buildd failures
+ <braunr> ok
+ <youpi> (so the actual bug here is EAGAIN
+ <youpi> )
+ <braunr> yes, so we can do something about it
+ <braunr> worth a look
+ <pinotree> (implement sysv semaphores)
+ <youpi> pinotree: if we could also solve all these buildd EAGAIN issues
+ that'd be nice :)
+ <braunr> that EAGAIN error might also be what makes exim behave badly and
+ loop forever
+ <youpi> possibly
+ <braunr> i've updated the trace with debugging symbols
+ <braunr> it fails on connect
+ <pinotree> like http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=563342 ?
+ <braunr> it's EAGAIN, not ECONNREFUSED
+ <pinotree> ah ok
+ <braunr> might be an error in tcp_v4_get_port
+
+
+## IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2012-12-06
+
+ <braunr> hmm, tcp_v4_get_port sometimes fails indeed
+ <gnu_srs> braunr: may I ask how you found out, adding print statements in
+ pfinet, or?
+ <braunr> yes
+ <gnu_srs> OK, so that's the only (easy) way to debug.
+ <braunr> that's the last resort
+ <braunr> gdb is easy too
+ <braunr> i could have added a breakpoint too
+ <braunr> but i didn't want to block pfinet while i was away
+ <braunr> is it possible to force the use of fakeroot-tcp on linux ?
+ <braunr> the problem seems to be that fakeroot doesn't close the sockets
+ that it connected to faked-tcp
+ <braunr> which, at some point, exhauts the port space
+ <pinotree> braunr: sure
+ <pinotree> change the fakeroot dpkg alternative
+ <braunr> ok
+ <pinotree> calling it explicitly `fakeroot-tcp command` or
+ `dpkg-buildpackage -rfakeroot-tcp ...` should work too
+ <braunr> fakeroot-tcp looks really evil :p
+ <braunr> hum, i don't see any faked-tcp process on linux :/
+ <pinotree> not even with `fakeroot-tcp bash -c "sleep 10"`?
+ <braunr> pinotree: now yes
+ <braunr> but, does it mean faked-tcp is started for *each* process loading
+ fakeroot-tcp ?
+ <braunr> (the lib i mean)
+ <pinotree> i think so
+ <braunr> well the hurd doesn't seem to do that at all
+ <braunr> or maybe it does and i don't see it
+ <braunr> the stale faked-tcp processes could be those that failed something
+ only
+ <pinotree> yes, there's also that issue: sometimes there are stake
+ faked-tcp processes
+ <braunr> hum no, i see one faked-tcp that consumes cpu when building glibc
+ <pinotree> *stale
+ <braunr> it's the same process for all commands
+ <pinotree> <braunr> but, does it mean faked-tcp is started for *each*
+ process loading fakeroot-tcp ?
+ <pinotree> → everytime you start fakeroot, there's a new faked-xxx for it
+ <braunr> it doesn't look that way
+ <braunr> again, on the hurd, i see one faked-tcp, consuming cpu while
+ building so i assume it services libfakeroot-tcp requests
+ <pinotree> yes
+ <braunr> which means i probably won't reproduce the problem on linux
+ <pinotree> it serves that fakeroot under which the binary(-arch) target is
+ run
+ <braunr> or perhaps it's the normal fakeroot-tcp behaviour on sid
+ <braunr> pinotree: a faked-tcp that is started for each command invocation
+ will implicitely make the network stack close all its sockets when
+ exiting
+ <braunr> pinotree: as our fakeroot-tcp uses the same instance of faked-tcp,
+ it's a lot more likely to exhaust the port space
+ <pinotree> i see
+ <braunr> i'll try on sid and see how it behaves
+ <braunr> pinotree: on the other hand, forking so many processes at each
+ command invocation may make exec leak a lot :p
+ <braunr> or rather, a lot more
+ <braunr> (or maybe not, since it leaks only in some cases)
+
+[[exec_leak]].
+
+ <braunr> pinotree: actually, the behaviour under linux is the same with the
+ alternative correctly set, whereas faked-tcp is restarted (if used at
+ all) with -rfakeroot-tcp
+ <braunr> hm no, even that isn't true
+ <braunr> grr
+ <braunr> pinotree: i think i found a handy workaround for fakeroot
+ <braunr> pinotree: the range of local ports in our networking stack is a
+ lot more limited than what is configured in current systems
+ <braunr> by extending it, i can now build glibc \o/
+ <pinotree> braunr: what are the current ours and the usual one?
+ <braunr> see pfinet/linux-src/net/ipv4/tcp_ipv4.c
+ <braunr> the modern ones are the ones suggested in the comment
+ <braunr> sysctl_local_port_range is the symbol storing the range
+ <pinotree> i see
+ <pinotree> what's the current range on linux?
+ <braunr> 20:44 < braunr> the modern ones are the ones suggested in the
+ comment
+ <pinotree> i see
+ <braunr> $ cat /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_local_port_range
+ <braunr> 32768 61000
+ <braunr> so, i'm not sure why we have the problem, since even on linux,
+ netstat doesn't show open bound ports, but it does help
+ <braunr> the fact faked-tcp can remain after its use is more problematic
+ <pinotree> (maybe pfinet could grow a (startup-only?) option to change it,
+ similar to that sysctl)
+ <braunr> but it can also stems from the same issue gnu_srs found about
+ closed sockets that haven't been shut down
+ <braunr> perhaps
+ <braunr> but i don't see the point actually
+ <braunr> we could simply change the values in the code
+
+ <braunr> youpi: first, in pfinet, i increased the range of local ports to
+ reduce the likeliness of port space exhaustion
+ <braunr> so we should get a lot less EAGAIN after that
+ <braunr> (i've not committed any of those changes)
+ <youpi> range of local ports?
+ <braunr> see pfinet/linux-src/net/ipv4/tcp_ipv4.c, tcp_v4_get_port function
+ and sysctl_local_port_range array
+ <youpi> oh
+ <braunr> EAGAIN is caused by tcp_v4_get_port failing at
+ <braunr> /* Exhausted local port range during search? */
+ <braunr> if (remaining <= 0)
+ <braunr> goto fail;
+ <youpi> interesting
+ <youpi> so it's not a hurd bug after all
+ <youpi> just a problem in fakeroot eating a lot of ports
+ <braunr> maybe because of the same issue gnu_srs worked on (bad socket
+ close when no clean shutdown)
+ <braunr> maybe, maybe not
+ <braunr> but increasing the range is effective
+ <braunr> and i compared with what linux does today, which is exactly what
+ is in the comment above sysctl_local_port_range
+ <braunr> so it looks safe
+ <youpi> so that means that the pfinet just uses ports 1024- 4999 for
+ auto-allocated ports?
+ <braunr> i guess so
+ <youpi> the linux pfinet I meant
+ <braunr> i haven't checked the whole code but it looks that way
+ <youpi> ./sysctl_net_ipv4.c:static int ip_local_port_range_min[] = { 1, 1
+ };
+ <youpi> ./sysctl_net_ipv4.c:static int ip_local_port_range_max[] = { 65535,
+ 65535 };
+ <youpi> looks like they have increased it since then :)
+ <braunr> hum :)
+ <braunr> $ cat /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_local_port_range
+ <braunr> 32768 61000
+ <youpi> yep, same here
+ <youpi> ./inet_connection_sock.c: .range = { 32768, 61000 },
+ <youpi> so there are two things apparently
+ <youpi> but linux now defaults to 32k-61k
+ <youpi> braunr: please just push the port range upgrade to 32Ki-61K
+ <braunr> ok, will do
+ <youpi> there's not reason not to do it
+
+
+## IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2012-12-11
+
+ <braunr> youpi: at least, i haven't had any failure building eglibc since
+ the port range patch
+ <youpi> good :)
diff --git a/open_issues/gnumach_memory_management.mdwn b/open_issues/gnumach_memory_management.mdwn
index 9feb30c..e5e9d2c 100644
--- a/open_issues/gnumach_memory_management.mdwn
+++ b/open_issues/gnumach_memory_management.mdwn
@@ -2133,3 +2133,52 @@ There is a [[!FF_project 266]][[!tag bounty]] on this task.
<braunr> do you want to review ?
<youpi> I don't think there is any need to
<braunr> ok
+
+
+# IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2012-12-08
+
+ <mcsim> braunr: hi. Do I understand correct that merely the same technique
+ is used in linux to determine the slab where, the object to be freed,
+ resides?
+ <braunr> yes but it's faster on linux since it uses a direct mapping of
+ physical memory
+ <braunr> it just has to shift the virtual address to obtain the physical
+ one, whereas x15 has to walk the pages tables
+ <braunr> of course it only works for kmalloc, vmalloc is entirely different
+ <mcsim> btw, is there sense to use some kind of B-tree instead of AVL to
+ decrease number of cache misses? AFAIK, in modern processors size of L1
+ cache line is at least 64 bytes, so in one node we can put at least 4
+ leafs (key + pointer to data) making search faster.
+ <braunr> that would be a b-tree
+ <braunr> and yes, red-black trees were actually developed based on
+ properties observed on b-trees
+ <braunr> but increasing the size of the nodes also increases memory
+ overhead
+ <braunr> and code complexity
+ <braunr> that's why i have a radix trees for cases where there are a large
+ number of entries with keys close to each other :)
+ <braunr> a radix-tree is basically a b-tree using the bits of the key as
+ indexes in the various arrays it walks instead of comparing keys to each
+ other
+ <braunr> the original avl tree used in my slab allocator was intended to
+ reduce the average height of the tree (avl is better for that)
+ <braunr> avl trees are more suited for cases where there are more lookups
+ than inserts/deletions
+ <braunr> they make the tree "flatter" but the maximum complexity of
+ operations that change the tree is 2log2(n), since rebalancing the tree
+ can make the algorithm reach back to the tree root
+ <braunr> red-black trees have slightly bigger heights but insertions are
+ limited to 2 rotations and deletions to 3
+ <mcsim> there should be not much lookups in slab allocators
+ <braunr> which explains why they're more generally found in generic
+ containers
+ <mcsim> or do I misunderstand something?
+ <braunr> well, there is a lookup for each free()
+ <braunr> whereas there are insertions/deletions when a slab becomes
+ non-empty/empty
+ <mcsim> I see
+ <braunr> so it was very efficient for caches of small objects, where slabs
+ have many of them
+ <braunr> also, i wrote the implementation in userspace, without
+ functionality pmap provides (although i could have emulated it
+ afterwards)
diff --git a/open_issues/libpthread.mdwn b/open_issues/libpthread.mdwn
index 81f1a38..befc137 100644
--- a/open_issues/libpthread.mdwn
+++ b/open_issues/libpthread.mdwn
@@ -1234,3 +1234,95 @@ There is a [[!FF_project 275]][[!tag bounty]] on this task.
of a "message server" à la dmesg
[[translator_stdout_stderr]].
+
+
+### IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2012-12-10
+
+ <youpi> braunr: unable to adjust libports thread priority: (ipc/send)
+ invalid destination port
+ <youpi> I'll see what package brought that
+ <youpi> (that was on a buildd)
+ <braunr> wow
+ <youpi> mkvtoolnix_5.9.0-1:
+ <pinotree> shouldn't that code be done in pthreads and then using such
+ pthread api? :p
+ <braunr> pinotree: you've already asked that question :p
+ <pinotree> i know :p
+ <braunr> the semantics of pthreads are larger than what we need, so that
+ will be done "later"
+ <braunr> but this error shouldn't happen
+ <braunr> it looks more like a random mach bug
+ <braunr> youpi: anything else on the console ?
+ <youpi> nope
+ <braunr> i'll add traces to know which step causes the error
+
+
+## IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2012-12-05
+
+ <braunr> tschwinge: i'm currently working on a few easy bugs and i have
+ planned improvements for libpthreads soon
+ <pinotree> wotwot, which ones?
+ <braunr> pinotree: first, fixing pthread_cond_timedwait (and everything
+ timedsomething actually)
+ <braunr> pinotree: then, fixing cancellation
+ <braunr> pinotree: and last but not least, optimizing thread wakeup
+ <braunr> i also want to try replacing spin locks and see if it does what i
+ expect
+ <pinotree> which fixes do you plan applying to cond_timedwait?
+ <braunr> see sysdeps/generic/pt-cond-timedwait.c
+ <braunr> the FIXME comment
+ <pinotree> ah that
+ <braunr> well that's important :)
+ <braunr> did you have something else in mind ?
+ <pinotree> hm, __pthread_timedblock... do you plan fixing directly there? i
+ remember having seem something related to that (but not on conditions),
+ but wasn't able to see further
+ <braunr> it has the same issue
+ <braunr> i don't remember the details, but i wrote a cthreads version that
+ does it right
+ <braunr> in the io_select_timeout branch
+ <braunr> see
+ http://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/hurd/hurd.git/tree/libthreads/cancel-cond.c?h=rbraun/select_timeout
+ for example
+ * pinotree looks
+ <braunr> what matters is the msg_delivered member used to synchronize
+ sleeper and waker
+ <braunr> the waker code is in
+ http://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/hurd/hurd.git/tree/libthreads/cprocs.c?h=rbraun/select_timeout
+ <pinotree> never seen cthreads' code before :)
+ <braunr> soon you shouldn't have any more reason to :p
+ <pinotree> ah, so basically the cthread version of the pthread cleanup
+ stack + cancelation (ie the cancel hook) broadcasts the condition
+ <braunr> yes
+ <pinotree> so a similar fix would be needed in all the places using
+ __pthread_timedblock, that is conditions and mutexes
+ <braunr> and that's what's missing in glibc that prevents deploying a
+ pthreads based hurd currently
+ <braunr> no that's unrelated
+ <pinotree> ok
+ <braunr> the problem is how __pthread_block/__pthread_timedblock is
+ synchronized with __pthread_wakeup
+ <braunr> libpthreads does exactly the same thing as cthreads for that,
+ i.e. use messages
+ <braunr> but the message alone isn't enough, since, as explained in the
+ FIXME comment, it can arrive too late
+ <braunr> it's not a problem for __pthread_block because this function can
+ only resume after receiving a message
+ <braunr> but it's a problem for __pthread_timedblock which can resume
+ because of a timeout
+ <braunr> my solution is to add a flag that says whether a message was
+ actually sent, and lock around sending the message, so that the thread
+ resume can accurately tell in which state it is
+ <braunr> and drain the message queue if needed
+ <pinotree> i see, race between the "i stop blocking because of timeout" and
+ "i stop because i got a message" with the actual check for the real cause
+ <braunr> locking around mach_msg may seem overkill but it's not in
+ practice, since there can only be one message at most in the message
+ queue
+ <braunr> and i checked that in practice by limiting the message queue size
+ and check for such errors
+ <braunr> but again, it would be far better with mutexes only, and no spin
+ locks
+ <braunr> i wondered for a long time why the load average was so high on the
+ hurd under even "light" loads
+ <braunr> now i know :)
diff --git a/open_issues/netstat.mdwn b/open_issues/netstat.mdwn
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..b575ea7
--- /dev/null
+++ b/open_issues/netstat.mdwn
@@ -0,0 +1,34 @@
+[[!meta copyright="Copyright © 2012 Free Software Foundation, Inc."]]
+
+[[!meta license="""[[!toggle id="license" text="GFDL 1.2+"]][[!toggleable
+id="license" text="Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this
+document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or
+any later version published by the Free Software Foundation; with no Invariant
+Sections, no Front-Cover Texts, and no Back-Cover Texts. A copy of the license
+is included in the section entitled [[GNU Free Documentation
+License|/fdl]]."]]"""]]
+
+[[!tag open_issue_glibc open_issue_hurd open_issue_porting]]
+
+
+# IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2012-12-06
+
+ <braunr> we need a netstat command
+ <pinotree> wouldn't that require rpcs and notifications in pfinet to get
+ info on the known sockets?
+ <braunr> depends on the interface
+ <braunr> netstat currently uses /proc/net/* so that's out of the question
+ <braunr> but a bsd netstat using ioctls could do the job
+ <braunr> i'm not sure if it's done that way
+ <braunr> i don't see why it would require notifications though
+ <pinotree> if add such rpcs to pfinet, you could show the sockets in procfs
+ <braunr> yes
+ <braunr> that's the clean way :p
+ <braunr> but why notifications ?
+ <pinotree> to get changes on data of sockets (status change, i/o activity,
+ etc)
+ <pinotree> (possibly i'm forgetting some already there features to know
+ that)
+ <braunr> the socket state is centralized in pfinet
+ <braunr> netstat polls it
+ <braunr> (or asks it once)
diff --git a/open_issues/performance.mdwn b/open_issues/performance.mdwn
index 8147e5e..ae05e12 100644
--- a/open_issues/performance.mdwn
+++ b/open_issues/performance.mdwn
@@ -83,6 +83,109 @@ call|/glibc/fork]]'s case.
<antrik> ouch
+## [[!message-id "20121202101508.GA30541@mail.sceen.net"]]
+
+
+## IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2012-12-04
+
+ <damo22> why do some people think hurd is slow? i find it works well even
+ under heavy load inside a virtual machine
+ <braunr> damo22: the virtual machine actually assists the hurd a lot :p
+ <braunr> but even with that, the hurd is a slow system
+ <damo22> i would have thought it would have the potential to be very fast,
+ considering the model of the kernel
+ <braunr> the design implies by definition more overhead, but the true cause
+ is more than 15 years without optimization on the core components
+ <braunr> how so ?
+ <damo22> since there are less layers of code between the hardware bare
+ metal and the application that users run
+ <braunr> how so ? :)
+ <braunr> it's the contrary actually
+ <damo22> VFS -> IPC -> scheduler -> device drivers -> hardware
+ <damo22> that is monolithic
+ <braunr> well, it's not really meaningful
+ <braunr> and i'd say the same applies for a microkernel system
+ <damo22> if the application can talk directly to hardware through the
+ kernel its almost like plugging directly into the hardware
+ <braunr> you never talk directly to hardware
+ <braunr> you talk to servers instead of the kernel
+ <damo22> ah
+ <braunr> consider monolithic kernel systems like systems with one big
+ server
+ <braunr> the kernel
+ <braunr> whereas a multiserver system is a kernel and many servers
+ <braunr> you still need the VFS to identify your service (and thus your
+ server)
+ <braunr> you need much more IPC, since system calls are "replaced" with RPC
+ <braunr> the scheduler is basically the same
+ <damo22> okay
+ <braunr> device drivers are similar too, except they run in thread context
+ (which is usually a bit heavier)
+ <damo22> but you can do cool things like report when an interrupt line is
+ blocked
+ <braunr> and there are many context switches between all that
+ <braunr> you can do all that in a monolithic kernel too, and faster
+ <braunr> but it's far more elegant, and (when well done) easy to do on a
+ microkernel based system
+ <damo22> yes
+ <damo22> i like elegant, makes coding easier if you know the basics
+ <braunr> there are only two major differences between a monolilthic kernel
+ and a multiserver microkernel system
+ * damo22 listens
+ <braunr> 1/ independence of location (your resources could be anywhere)
+ <braunr> 2/ separation of address spaces (your servers have their own
+ addresses)
+ <damo22> wow
+ <braunr> these both imply additional layers of indirection, making the
+ system as a whole slower
+ <damo22> but it would be far more secure though i suspect
+ <braunr> yes
+ <braunr> and reliable
+ <braunr> that's why systems like qnx were usually adopted for critical
+ tasks
+ <damo22> security and reliability are very important, i would switch to the
+ hurd if it supported all the hardware i use
+ <braunr> so would i :)
+ <braunr> but performance matters too
+ <damo22> not to me
+ <braunr> it should :p
+ <braunr> it really does matter a lot in practice
+ <damo22> i mean, a 2x slowdown compared to linux would not affect me
+ <damo22> if it had all the benefits we mentioned above
+ <braunr> but the hurd is really slow for other reasons than its additional
+ layers of indrection unfortunately
+ <damo22> is it because of lack of optimisation in the core code?
+ <braunr> we're working on these issues, but it's not easy and takes a lot
+ of time :p
+ <damo22> like you said
+ <braunr> yes
+ <braunr> and also because of some fundamental design choices related to the
+ microkernel back in the 80s
+ <damo22> what about the darwin system
+ <damo22> it uses a mach kernel?
+ <braunr> yes
+ <damo22> what is stopping someone taking the MIT code from darwin and
+ creating a monster free OS
+ <braunr> what for ?
+ <damo22> because it already has hardware support
+ <damo22> and a mach kernel
+ <braunr> in kernel drivers ?
+ <damo22> it has kernel extensions
+ <damo22> you can do things like kextload module
+ <braunr> first, being a mach kernel doesn't make it compatible or even
+ easily usable with the hurd, the interfaces have evolved independantly
+ <braunr> and second, we really do want more stuff out of the kernel
+ <braunr> drivers in particular
+ <damo22> may i ask why you are very keen to have drivers out of kernel?
+ <braunr> for the same reason we want other system services out of the
+ kernel
+ <braunr> security, reliability, etc..
+ <braunr> ease of debugging
+ <braunr> the ability to restart drivers separately, without restarting the
+ kernel
+ <damo22> i see
+
+
# IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2012-09-13
{{$news/2011-q2#phoronix-3}}.
diff --git a/open_issues/robustness.mdwn b/open_issues/robustness.mdwn
index d32bd50..1f8aa0c 100644
--- a/open_issues/robustness.mdwn
+++ b/open_issues/robustness.mdwn
@@ -62,3 +62,68 @@ License|/fdl]]."]]"""]]
<antrik> well, I'm not aware of the Minix implementation working across
reboots. the one I have in mind based on a generic session management
infrastructure should though :-)
+
+
+## IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2012-12-06
+
+ <Tekk_> out of curiosity, would it be possible to strap on a resurrection
+ server to hurd?
+ <Tekk_> in the future, that is
+ <braunr> sure
+ <Tekk_> cool :)
+ <braunr> but this requires things like persistence
+ <spiderweb> like a reincarnation server?
+ <braunr> it's a lot of works, with non negligible overhead
+ <Tekk_> spiderweb: yes, exactly. I didn't remember tanenbaum's wording on
+ that
+ <braunr> i'm pretty sure most people would be against that
+ <spiderweb> braunr: why so?
+ <Tekk_> it was actually the feature that convinced me that ukernels were a
+ good idea
+ <Tekk_> spiderweb: because then you need a process that keeps track of all
+ the other servers
+ <Tekk_> and they have to be replying to "useless" pings to see if they're
+ still alive
+ <braunr> spiderweb: the hurd community isn't looking for a system reliable
+ in critical environments
+ <braunr> just a general purpose system
+ <braunr> and persistence requires regular data saves
+ <braunr> it's expensive
+ <Tekk_> as well as that
+ <braunr> we already have performance problems because of the nature of the
+ system, adding more without really looking for the benefits is useless
+ <spiderweb> so you can't theoretically have both?
+ <braunr> persistence and performance ?
+ <braunr> it's hard
+ <Tekk_> spiderweb: you need to modify the other translators to be
+ persistent
+ <braunr> only the ones you care about actually
+ <braunr> but it's just better to make the critical servers very stable
+ <Tekk_> so it's not just turning on and off the reincarnation
+ <braunr> (there isn't that much code there)
+ <braunr> and the other servers restartable
+ <mcsim> braunr: I think that if there will be aim to make something like
+ resurrection server than it will be needed rewrite most servers to make
+ them stateless, isn't it?
+ <braunr> that's a lot easier and already works with non essential passive
+ translators
+ <Tekk_> mcsim: pretty much
+ <braunr> mcsim: only those you care about
+ <braunr> mcsim: the proc auth exec servers for example, perhaps the file
+ system servers that can act as root fs, but the others would simply be
+ restarted by the passive translator mechanism
+ <spiderweb> what about restarting device drivers, that would be simple
+ right?
+ <braunr> that's perfectly doable, yes
+ <spiderweb> (being an OS newbie) - it does seem to me that the whole
+ reincarnation server concept could quite possibly be a band aid.
+ <braunr> spiderweb: no it really works
+ <braunr> many systems do that actually
+ <braunr> let me give you a link
+ <braunr>
+ http://ftp.sceen.net/curios_improving_reliability_through_operating_system_structure.pdf
+ <braunr> it's a bit old, but there is a review of systems aiming at
+ resilience and how they achieve part of it
+ <spiderweb> neat, thanks
+ <braunr> actually it's not that old at all
+ <braunr> around 2007
diff --git a/open_issues/select.mdwn b/open_issues/select.mdwn
index 12807e1..778af53 100644
--- a/open_issues/select.mdwn
+++ b/open_issues/select.mdwn
@@ -1503,6 +1503,134 @@ IRC, unknown channel, unknown date:
[[Term_blocking]].
+# IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2012-12-05
+
+ <braunr> well if i'm unable to build my own packages, i'll send you the one
+ line patch i wrote that fixes select/poll for the case where there is
+ only one descriptor
+ <braunr> (the current code calls mach_msg twice, each time with the same
+ timeout, doubling the total wait time when there is no event)
+
+
+## IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2012-12-06
+
+ <braunr> damn, my eglibc patch breaks select :x
+ <braunr> i guess i'll just simplify the code by using the same path for
+ both single fd and multiple fd calls
+ <braunr> at least, the patch does fix the case i wanted it to .. :)
+ <braunr> htop and ping act at the right regular interval
+ <braunr> my select patch is :
+ <braunr> /* Now wait for reply messages. */
+ <braunr> - if (!err && got == 0)
+ <braunr> + if (!err && got == 0 && firstfd != -1 && firstfd != lastfd)
+ <braunr> basically, when there is a single fd, the code calls io_select
+ with a timeout
+ <braunr> and later calls mach_msg with the same timeout
+ <braunr> effectively making the maximum wait time twice what it should be
+ <pinotree> ouch
+ <braunr> which is why htop and ping are "laggy"
+ <braunr> and perhaps also why fakeroot is when building libc
+ <braunr> well
+ <braunr> when building packages
+ <braunr> my patch avoids entering the mach_msg call if there is only one fd
+ <braunr> (my failed attempt didn't have the firstfd != -1 check, leading to
+ the 0 fd case skipping mach_msg too, which is wrong since in that case
+ there is just no wait, making applications use select/poll for sleeping
+ consume all cpu)
+
+ <braunr> the second is a fix in select (yet another) for the case where a
+ single fd is passed
+ <braunr> in which case there is one timeout directly passed in the
+ io_select call, but then yet another in the mach_msg call that waits for
+ replies
+ <braunr> this can account for the slowness of a bunch of select/poll users
+
+
+## IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2012-12-07
+
+ <braunr> finally, my select patch works :)
+
+
+## IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2012-12-08
+
+ <braunr> for those interested, i pushed my eglibc packages that include
+ this little select/poll timeout fix on my debian repository
+ <braunr> deb http://ftp.sceen.net/debian-hurd experimental/
+ <braunr> reports are welcome, i'm especially interested in potential
+ regressions
+
+
+## IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2012-12-10
+
+ <gnu_srs> I have verified your double timeout bug in hurdselect.c.
+ <gnu_srs> Since I'm also working on hurdselect I have a few questions
+ about where the timeouts in mach_msg and io_select are implemented.
+ <gnu_srs> Have a big problem to trace them down to actual code: mig magic
+ again?
+ <braunr> yes
+ <braunr> see hurd/io.defs, io_select includes a waittime timeout:
+ natural_t; parameter
+ <braunr> waittime is mig magic that tells the client side not to wait more
+ than the timeout
+ <braunr> and in _hurd_select, you can see these lines :
+ <braunr> err = __io_select (d[i].io_port, d[i].reply_port,
+ <braunr> /* Poll only if there's a single
+ descriptor. */
+ <braunr> (firstfd == lastfd) ? to : 0,
+ <braunr> to being the timeout previously computed
+ <braunr> "to"
+ <braunr> and later, when waiting for replies :
+ <braunr> while ((msgerr = __mach_msg (&msg.head,
+ <braunr> MACH_RCV_MSG | options,
+ <braunr> 0, sizeof msg, portset, to,
+ <braunr> MACH_PORT_NULL)) ==
+ MACH_MSG_SUCCESS)
+ <braunr> the same timeout is used
+ <braunr> hope it helps
+ <gnu_srs> Additional stuff on io-select question is at
+ http://paste.debian.net/215401/
+ <gnu_srs> Sorry, should have posted it before you comment, but was
+ disturbed.
+ <braunr> 14:13 < braunr> waittime is mig magic that tells the client side
+ not to wait more than the timeout
+ <braunr> the waittime argument is a client argument only
+ <braunr> that's one of the main source of problems with select/poll, and
+ the one i fixed 6 months ago
+ <gnu_srs> so there is no relation to the third argument of the client call
+ and the third argument of the server code?
+ <braunr> no
+ <braunr> the 3rd argument at server side is undoubtedly the 4th at client
+ side here
+ <gnu_srs> but for the fourth argument there is?
+ <braunr> i think i've just answered that
+ <braunr> when in doubt, check the code generated by mig when building glibc
+ <gnu_srs> as I said before, I have verified the timeout bug you solved.
+ <gnu_srs> which code to look for RPC_*?
+ <braunr> should be easy to guess
+ <gnu_srs> is it the same with mach_msg()? No explicit usage of the timeout
+ there either.
+ <gnu_srs> in the code for the function I mean.
+ <braunr> gnu_srs: mach_msg is a low level system call
+ <braunr> see
+ http://www.gnu.org/software/hurd/gnumach-doc/Mach-Message-Call.html#Mach-Message-Call
+ <gnu_srs> found the definition of __io_select in: RPC_io_select.c, thanks.
+ <gnu_srs> so the client code to look for wrt RPC_ is in hurd/*.defs? what
+ about the gnumach/*/include/*.defs?
+ <gnu_srs> a final question: why use a timeout if there is a single FD for
+ the __io_select call, not when there are more than one?
+ <braunr> well, the code is obviously buggy, so don't expect me to justify
+ wrong code
+ <braunr> but i suppose the idea was : if there is only one fd, perform a
+ classical synchronous RPC, whereas if there are more use a heavyweight
+ portset and additional code to receive replies
+
+ <youpi> exim4 didn't get fixed by the libc patch, unfortunately
+ <braunr> yes i noticed
+ <braunr> gdb can't attach correctly to exim, so it's probably something
+ completely different
+ <braunr> i'll try the non intrusive mode
+
+
# See Also
See also [[select_bogus_fd]] and [[select_vs_signals]].