diff options
21 files changed, 1025 insertions, 75 deletions
diff --git a/community/gsoc/project_ideas/namespace-based_translator_selection/discussion.mdwn b/community/gsoc/project_ideas/namespace-based_translator_selection/discussion.mdwn new file mode 100644 index 00000000..befd680a --- /dev/null +++ b/community/gsoc/project_ideas/namespace-based_translator_selection/discussion.mdwn @@ -0,0 +1,64 @@ +[[!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_hurd]] + + +# IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2012-04-22 + + <youpi> btw, I was wondering, when working on namespace mangling, did they + think about automatitioning ? + <youpi> autopartitioning, I meant + <youpi> i.e. with a foo.img file, open foo.img,,part1 + <braunr> what are you referring to with namespace mangling + <youpi> and voila + <youpi> I don't remember the exact term they used + <braunr> you mean there is a hurd library that parses names and can direct + to different services depending on part of the name ? + <youpi> namespace-based_translator_selection + <youpi> yes + <braunr> i thought it only handled directories + <braunr> well, the classical path representation + * civodul finds it ugly + <youpi> civodul: because of potential conflict, and the not-too-nice ",," + part? + <youpi> actually I wonder whether using directory access would be nicer + <youpi> i.e. you have a foo.gz, just open foo.gz/gunzip to get the unzipped + content + <youpi> and for foo.img.gz, open foo.img.gz/gunzip/part/1 + <civodul> youpi: because of the interpretation of special chars in file + names + <civodul> users should be free to use any character they like in file names + <civodul> foo.gz/gunzip looks nicer to me + <youpi> ok, so we agree + <youpi> that said, the user could choose the separator + <youpi> the namespace can be not run by root for everybody, but just for + your shell, run by yourself + <antrik> civodul: the user can't use any character anyways... '/' and '\0' + are reserved :-P + <civodul> antrik: '/' isn't quite reserved on the Hurd :-) + <civodul> you could implement dir_lookup such that it does something + special about it + <civodul> (server-side) + <antrik> civodul: as for overloading '/', although I haven't thought it + through entirely, I guess that would work for nodes that present as files + normally. however, it would *not* work for directory nodes + <antrik> which would be quite a serious limitation IMHO + <antrik> I can think of various kinds of useful directory translators + <antrik> what's more, one of the main use cases I originally had in mind is + a policy filter + <antrik> you could pass a directory name with a appropriate filter applied + to tar for example, so it wouldn't try to follow any translators + <antrik> I don't see why taking an obscure prefix like ,, would be much of + a problem in practice anyways + <antrik> (also, it doesn't strictly prevent the user from having such file + names... you just need to escape it if accessing such files through the + namespace multiplexer. though admittedly that would need some special + handling in *some* programs to work properly) diff --git a/hurd/console.mdwn b/hurd/console.mdwn index f7230011..55581870 100644 --- a/hurd/console.mdwn +++ b/hurd/console.mdwn @@ -1,5 +1,5 @@ -[[!meta copyright="Copyright © 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2009, 2011 -Free Software Foundation, Inc."]] +[[!meta copyright="Copyright © 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2009, 2011, +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 @@ -9,6 +9,11 @@ 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]]."]]"""]] +[[!toc]] + + +# Architecture: client and server + The Hurd console's implementation is broken into two pieces each running on it's own process, the console client and server. @@ -79,9 +84,9 @@ blocking operations and a blocked `input_dequeue` necessarily needs an `ports_manage_multithreaded` API. ---- +# Old stuff -/!\ old content; [[!taglink open_issue_documentation]]: cleanup needed. +[[!taglink open_issue_documentation]]: cleanup needed. The below is a reworked version of Marcus Brinkmann's [letter to the debian-hurd list](http://lists.debian.org/debian-hurd/2002/debian-hurd-200209/msg00054.html). It describes how to setup the new console server for the Hurd. I am testing this right now, so this document is a work in progress. @@ -357,3 +362,101 @@ An [experimental plugin to load XKB keymaps](http://kilobug.free.fr/hurd/xkb-0.3 Added examples that use repeaters needed by X. -- [[Main/OgnyanKulev]] - 18 Sep 2004 + + +# IRC, freenode #hurd, 2012-04-23 + + <Tekk_> is there any way to get copy/paste in hurd? + <Tekk_> with the console server + <Tekk_> like you get with gpm + <youpi> Tekk_: by implementing it + <antrik> Tekk_: that's something for the console client, not the server + <antrik> (or perhaps both? not entirely sure) + <Tekk_> antrik: I'm not entirely sure how the client works + <Tekk_> does it start a new client with each tty? + <Tekk_> or one client handles all of them? + <youpi> the client only should be enough + <youpi> it handles all input already anyway + <youpi> the client handles all ttys + <youpi> it just hops over them according to alt-Fx shortcuts + <antrik> Tekk_: there is only one client for all, but a separate console + *server* for each tty + <Tekk_> antrik: ah, the ever confusing X scheme + <antrik> no + <antrik> the client handles multiplexing and actual terminal I/O + <antrik> the servers handle the state of the virtual terminals, and provide + the device nodes + <antrik> this doesn't fit with the X scheme in any way + <antrik> (where everything is basically in one big monolithic server + process) + <Tekk_> antrik: I mean that you're running multiple servers and there's one + big client running on the other end + <Tekk_> which always pretty well confuses everyone to start with + <antrik> I totally fail to see the connection + <antrik> there is usually one X server, with potentially many clients + <Tekk_> nevermind + <Tekk_> doesn't really matter to anything + <Tekk_> so yeah, copy/paste would be in the client? + <antrik> unless you mean a termial server, running actual client programs, + connected to various terminals, running X servers... which is where it + gets confusing in a way ;-) + <antrik> but there is really no relation at all here + <Tekk_> antrik: exactly ;) + <Tekk_> I meant in the traditional sense, where you're on a thin client + running an X server and the remote server is running X clients + <Tekk_> copy/paste probably isn't really too bad + <antrik> applications are also clients of the terminal server processes; + but having a completely different role (and using completely different + requests) than the console client + <Tekk_> you have a buffer, when something is highlighted you strncpy the + highlighted text into the buffer. when middle click happens you send the + text to the right virtual terminal + <antrik> right. what I was considering is whether the pasting (and possibly + also grabbing) the text might be done through some separate protocol + implemented in the console server, rather than the ordinary console + client interfaces... but probably no need for that + <Tekk_> nah, as long as you have a way of getting a highlighted area and + then the text contained in it + <Tekk_> and then of course a way to insert text where the cursor is, but + I'm pretty sure you can safely assume that one :P + <antrik> well, the client has a way to send keystrokes to the server, + obviously. the question here is whether pretending the pasting is + keystrokes is good enough, or whether it might be useful to have an + explicit way to push the pasted stuff to the server + <antrik> (the cursor position is relevant only for echo) + <Tekk_> antrik: I'll try to grab the console source some time this week and + take a look + <Tekk_> maybe I can try to get it working + <antrik> good luck :-) + <antrik> it's probably not too hard + <Tekk_> I'm sure I'll need it :) + <antrik> the whole console machinery is quite hard to grasp (and I still + find myself confused sometimes, although I gained a pretty good + understanding I think when writing my thesis) + <antrik> but for this specific task, not much knowlegde should be needed + about the various confusing aspects + <Tekk_> hmm. looks like copy/paste won + <Tekk_> 't be a quick thing, actually + <Tekk_> wait, no. there must be a way to get mouse events + <Tekk_> how else could you move the mouse.. + <Tekk_> (with by moving your mouse, not cons_mouse_move) + <Tekk_> by moving your mouse* + <Tekk_> started typing something different + + +# Graphics/Higher Resolution + +## IRC, freenode #hurd, 2012-04-24 + + <Tekk_> does the console support higher resolutions yet? + <youpi> no + <youpi> it's just textonly + <antrik> Tekk_: the main reason why I originally started on the KGI work + was to get a graphical console... but I never finished that part + <antrik> (since KGI is obsolete anyways) + <antrik> BTW, there is a KMS-based userspace console now for Linux... I + guess it should be easy to adapt to other systems having KMS support + <antrik> I don't think it actually makes much sense for Linux, as it's one + of the hardest and least profitable things to move out of a monolithic + kernel... + <antrik> well, not hardest I guess; but most problematic diff --git a/hurd/translator/devfs.mdwn b/hurd/translator/devfs.mdwn index 8784e998..a9cc307f 100644 --- a/hurd/translator/devfs.mdwn +++ b/hurd/translator/devfs.mdwn @@ -12,7 +12,7 @@ License|/fdl]]."]]"""]] in there in a dynamic fashion -- as compared to static passive translator settings as they're used now. -`devfs` has not yet been written. +`devfs` has not yet been written. [[!tag open_issue_hurd]] --- @@ -23,6 +23,8 @@ path is resident at all times. # IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2012-01-29 +[[!tag open_issue_documentation]] + <pinotree> what would be an hurdish way to achieve something like the various system (udev, devfs, devd, etc) for populating devices files automatically according to the found system devices? @@ -37,3 +39,35 @@ path is resident at all times. /dev directory with unique device names... probably need some unionfs-like translator that collects the individual driver nodes in an intelligent manner + + +# IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2012-04-22 + + <antrik> braunr: I don't think it's a problem that translators are invoked + when listing /dev + <antrik> the problem is that they linger around although they are very + unlikely to be needed again any time soon + <youpi> for now it's not too much a problem because there aren't too many + <youpi> but that can become problematic + <pinotree> a devfs on /dev could also fill it with new devices + <youpi> but only with the ones that actually exist + <pinotree> yeah + <braunr> antrik: i mean, the hurd may lack a feature allowing the same + translator to be used for several nodes not hierarically related + <braunr> antrik: or rather, it's a special case that we should implement + differently + <braunr> (with e.g. a devfs that can route requests for different nodes to + a same translator + <braunr> ) + <antrik> I agree BTW that some intermediary for /dev would be helpful -- + but I don't think it should actually take over any RPC handling; rather, + only redirect the requests as appropriate (with the actual device nodes + in a hierarchical bus-centric layout) + <braunr> right + <antrik> braunr: actually, the Hurd *does* have a feature allowing the same + translator to be attached to several unrelated nodes + <braunr> i keep getting surprised :) + <antrik> though it's only used in very few places right now + <youpi> pfinet and ptys at least ? + <antrik> yeah, and console client IIRC + diff --git a/hurd/translator/ext2fs.mdwn b/hurd/translator/ext2fs.mdwn index fff2e74b..ad79c7b9 100644 --- a/hurd/translator/ext2fs.mdwn +++ b/hurd/translator/ext2fs.mdwn @@ -1,18 +1,23 @@ -[[!meta copyright="Copyright © 2007, 2008, 2010, 2011 Free Software Foundation, -Inc."]] +[[!meta copyright="Copyright © 2007, 2008, 2010, 2011, 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]]."]]"""]] +is included in the section entitled [[GNU Free Documentation +License|/fdl]]."]]"""]] + # Implementation * [[filetype]] option + * [[Hurd-specific_extensions]] + + * [[Page_cache]] + ## Large Stores diff --git a/hurd/translator/ext2fs/hurd-specific_extensions.mdwn b/hurd/translator/ext2fs/hurd-specific_extensions.mdwn new file mode 100644 index 00000000..774f1cf3 --- /dev/null +++ b/hurd/translator/ext2fs/hurd-specific_extensions.mdwn @@ -0,0 +1,23 @@ +[[!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_documentation]] + + +# IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2012-04-20 + + <Tekk_> what are the extensions to ext2? + <Tekk_> that hurd uses + <braunr> tha ability to store passive translator command lines in the + inodes + <braunr> the* + <antrik> well, also a fourth set of permission bits, and an "author" field + <braunr> right + <antrik> both very obscure features that better never existed... diff --git a/hurd/translator/ext2fs/page_cache.mdwn b/hurd/translator/ext2fs/page_cache.mdwn new file mode 100644 index 00000000..e8a964ed --- /dev/null +++ b/hurd/translator/ext2fs/page_cache.mdwn @@ -0,0 +1,31 @@ +[[!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_documentation]] + +This is not at all specific to ext2fs, so should be integrated elsewhere. + + +# IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2012-04-22 + + <Tekk_> is there any particular reason ext2fs takes so much memory? + <Tekk_> it beats everything on my system hands down at 100 MB + <youpi> ext2fs contains the page cache + <youpi> so it's no wonder it takes memory + <youpi> it's all the mapped files + <Tekk_> any way I can cut down on that? + <Tekk_> my system only has 512 meg :/ + <youpi> gnumach is supposed to automatically cut it down as needed + <youpi> what is the actual symptom that you see? + <Tekk_> youpi: 360 MB of memory usage when I'm doing nothing + <Tekk_> oh, is it just intelligent enough to cut down when I'm using more + memory? + <youpi> Tekk_: yes + <Tekk_> awesome. I was worried :) diff --git a/hurd/translator/procfs/jkoenig/discussion.mdwn b/hurd/translator/procfs/jkoenig/discussion.mdwn index 339fab50..e7fdf46e 100644 --- a/hurd/translator/procfs/jkoenig/discussion.mdwn +++ b/hurd/translator/procfs/jkoenig/discussion.mdwn @@ -1,4 +1,5 @@ -[[!meta copyright="Copyright © 2010, 2011 Free Software Foundation, Inc."]] +[[!meta copyright="Copyright © 2010, 2011, 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 @@ -218,3 +219,61 @@ Needed by glibc's `pldd` tool (commit # `/proc/self/exe` [[!message-id "alpine.LFD.2.02.1110111111260.2016@akari"]] + + +# `/proc/[PID]/fd/` + +## IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2012-04-24 + + <antrik> braunr: /proc/*/fd can be implemented in several ways. none of + them would require undue centralisation + <antrik> braunr: the easiest would be adding one more type of magic lookup + to the existing magic lookup mechanism + <antrik> wait, I mean /proc/self... for /proc/*/fd it's even more + straighforward -- we might even have a magic lookup for that already + <pinotree> i guess the ideal thing would be implement that fd logic in + libps + <antrik> pinotree: nope. it doesn't need to ask proc (or any other server) + at all. it's local information. that's what we have the magic lookups for + <antrik> one option we were considering at some point would be using the + object migration mechanism, so the actual handling would still happen + client-side, but the server could supply the code doing it. this would + allow servers to add arbitrary magic lookup methods without any global + modifications... but has other downsides :-) + <gnu_srs> youpi: How much info for /proc/*/fd is possible to get from + libps? Re: d-h@ + <youpi> see my mail + <youpi> I don't think there is an interface for that + <youpi> processes handle fds themselves + <youpi> so libps would have to peek in there + <youpi> and I don't remember having seen any code like that + <gnu_srs> 10:17:17< antrik> wait, I mean /proc/self... for /proc/*/fd it's + even more straighforward -- we might even have a magic lookup for that + already + <gnu_srs> pinotree: For me that does not ring a bell on RPCs. Don't know + what magic means,, + <youpi> for /proc/self/fd we have a magic lookup + <youpi> for /proc/pid/fd, I don't think we have + <gnu_srs> magic lookup* + <gnu_srs> magic lookup == RPC? + <youpi> magic lookup is a kind of answer to the lookup RPC + <youpi> that basically says "it's somewhere else, see there" + <youpi> the magic FD lookup tells the process "it's your FD number x" + <youpi> which works for /proc/self/fd, but not /proc/pid/fd + <civodul> youpi, gnu_srs: regarding FDs, there the msg_get_fd RPC that + could be used + <civodul> `msgport' should have --get-fd, actually + <youpi> civodul: I assumed that the reason why msgport doesn't have it is + that it didn't exist + <youpi> so we can get a port on the fd + <youpi> but then how to know what it is? + <civodul> youpi: ah, you mean for the /proc/X/fd symlinks? + <civodul> good question + <civodul> it's not designed to be mapped back to names, indeed :-) + <antrik> youpi: yeah, I realized myself that only /proc/self/fd is trivial + <antrik> BTW, in Linux it's nor real symlinks. it's magic, with some very + strange (but useful in certain situations) semantics + <antrik> not real symlinks + <antrik> it's very weird for example for fd connected to files that have + been unlinked. it looks like a broken symlink, but when dereferencing + (e.g. with cp), you get the actual file contents... diff --git a/open_issues/bpf.mdwn b/open_issues/bpf.mdwn index 2a8c897a..e24d761b 100644 --- a/open_issues/bpf.mdwn +++ b/open_issues/bpf.mdwn @@ -562,3 +562,26 @@ This is a collection of resources concerning *Berkeley Packet Filter*s. DDE accordingly <braunr> antrik: i agree <braunr> antrik: eth-multiplexer would be the right place + + +## IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2012-04-24 + + <gnu_srs> braunr: Is BPF fully supported by now? Can it be used for + isc-dhcp? + <braunr> gnu_srs: bpf isn't supported at all + <braunr> gnu_srs: instead of emulating it, i added a hurd-specific module + in libpcap + <braunr> if isc-dhcp can use libpcap, then fine + <braunr> (otherwise we could create a hurd-specific patch for dhcp that + uses the in-kernel bpf filter implementation) + <braunr> gnu_srs: can't it use a raw socket ? + <youpi> it can + <youpi> it's just that the shape of the patch to do so wasn't exactly how + they needed it + <youpi> so they have to rework it a bit + <youpi> and that takes time + <braunr> ok + <braunr> antrik: for now, we prefer encapsulating the system specific code + in libpcap, and let users of that library benefit from it + <braunr> instead of implementing the low level bpf interface, which + nonetheless has some system-specific variants .. diff --git a/open_issues/glibc.mdwn b/open_issues/glibc.mdwn index b15c880a..26fa6012 100644 --- a/open_issues/glibc.mdwn +++ b/open_issues/glibc.mdwn @@ -202,11 +202,59 @@ Last reviewed up to the [[Git mirror's d40c5d54cb551acba4ef1617464760c5b3d41a14 `CLOCK_REALTIME_ALARM`, `O_PATH`, `PTRACE_*` (for example, cbff0d9689c4d68578b6a4f0a17807232506ea27), `RLIMIT_RTTIME`, `SEEK_DATA` (`unistd.h`), `SEEK_HOLE` (`unistd.h`) - `clock_adjtime`, `fallocate`, `fallocate64`, `getcontext` (and - `setcontext`), `name_to_handle_at`, `open_by_handle_at`, - `process_vm_readv`, `process_vm_writev`, `sendmmsg`, + `clock_adjtime`, `fallocate`, `fallocate64`, `name_to_handle_at`, + `open_by_handle_at`, `process_vm_readv`, `process_vm_writev`, `sendmmsg`, `setns`, `sync_file_range` + * `getcontext`/`setcontext` + + Needed for [[gccgo]]. + + IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2012-04-19: + + <gnu_srs> How much work/knowledge is needed to implement + getcontext/setcontext? + <gnu_srs> Any already implemented alternatives available? + <youpi> x86 registers knowledge, as well as unix signal masks + <youpi> there's the linux implementation that can be taken as an + exxample, but the signal part has to be rewritten + <gnu_srs> Well, it's a pity they are not implemented. That's the + remaining hurdle to get gccgo working :-( + <youpi> uh :/ + <gnu_srs> Everything builds, but the testsuite fails due to these + missing functions. + <gnu_srs> Regarding getcontext/setcontext they seem to be written + in assembly for linux but the code is not very long. + <gnu_srs> How much effort would it be to write something similar + for Hurd? Anybody fluent in asm? + <gnu_srs> And registers and signals. + <tschwinge> gnu_srs: Signals is the key thing -- everything else we + can probably just copy. I have never/not yet looked at it, + though. + <gnu_srs> For kfreebsd it is written in C: kern_context.c, 3/4 in + one file: getcontext, setcontext, swapcontext, not makecontext. + <gnu_srs> Dunno how much assembly calls used though. + <gnu_srs> Hi, any preferences about implementing get/setcontext in + C or Asm? + <tschwinge> gnu_srs: I think these will have to be implemented in + assembly. Based on the Linux x86 variants. + + IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2012-04-20: + + <tschwinge> youpi: Your understanding of that is better than mine + -- the *context stuff can't be very useful at the moment, because + when the user changes uc_stack.ss_sp (which the glibc tests are + doing), we're losing access to the _hurd_threadvars. Correct? + <tschwinge> At least the getcontext test works, the other get a + SIGILL. + <tschwinge> others + <tschwinge> _hurd_threadvars issue is just guessing. + <youpi> tschwinge: yes, threadvars are on the stack + <youpi> threadvars is not much code, it should just work, but care + has to be taken on the libpthread/libthread side, which does some + initialization + <tschwinge> OK, that at least matches my understanding. + * `syncfs` We should be easily able to implement that one. @@ -264,6 +312,35 @@ Last reviewed up to the [[Git mirror's d40c5d54cb551acba4ef1617464760c5b3d41a14 * `timespec_get` (74033a2507841cf077e31221de2481ff30b43d51) + * `waitflags.h` (`WEXITED`, `WNOWAIT`, `WSTOPPED`, `WCONTINUED`) + + IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2012-04-20: + + <pinotree> in glibc, we use the generic waitflags.h which, unlike + linux's version, does not define WEXITED, WNOWAIT, WSTOPPED, + WCONTINUED + <pinotree> should the generic bits/waitflags.h define them anyway, + since they are posix? + <youpi> well, we'd have to implement them anyway + <youpi> but otherwise, I'd say yes + <pinotree> sure, but since glibc headers should expose at least + everything declared by posix, i thought they should be defined + anyway + <youpi> that might bring bugs + <youpi> some applications might be #ifdefing them + <youpi> and break when they are defined but not working + <pinotree> i guess they would define them to 0, andd having them to + non-zero values shouldn't break them (since those values don't do + anything, so they would act as if they were 0.. or not?) + <youpi> no, I mean they would do something else, not define them to + 0 + <pinotree> like posix/tst-waitid.c, you mean? + <youpi> yes + + For specific packages: + + * [[octave]] + * Create `t/cleanup_kernel-features.h`. * Add tests from Linux kernel commit messages for `t/dup3` et al. diff --git a/open_issues/glibc/getlogin_r.mdwn b/open_issues/glibc/getlogin_r.mdwn new file mode 100644 index 00000000..9980ea1f --- /dev/null +++ b/open_issues/glibc/getlogin_r.mdwn @@ -0,0 +1,45 @@ +[[!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]]."]]"""]] + +[[!meta title="getlogin_r"]] + +[[!tag open_issue_glibc]] + + +# IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2012-04-23 + + * pinotree spots how our getlogin_r() implementation uses a static + buffer... + <braunr> oO + <pinotree> braunr: yeah, the _r means "reentrantbutnotreally" xD + <braunr> pinotree: that's amazing .. + <antrik> pinotree: without having checked the actual implementation, that + doesn't sound like a problem... + <antrik> caching doesn't break reentrancy. the problem with the plain + getlogin() is that a static buffer is *returned to the user* + <pinotree> antrik: http://paste.debian.net/164727/ + <braunr> ah, caching + <pinotree> i don't think this is caching at all + <antrik> pinotree: OK, not actually caching... but same effect as far as I + can tell + <antrik> pinotree: or is it the fixed size of the temporary variable you + are concerned about? + <pinotree> antrik: my concern was about the "static" of the buffer used for + the get_login rpc + <antrik> pinotree: I'm not sure that's a problem. can the login actually + ever change for a running process? + <pinotree> dunno + <pinotree> but if so, it would be pointless to do the rpc every time + instead of just once + <antrik> pinotree: true + * pinotree would just make it non-static and be safe + <antrik> pinotree: well, one might argue that allocating a KiB of stack + space is not very friendly, especially in a low-level library... + <antrik> not sure what the general policy is about such things in libc diff --git a/open_issues/glibc/octave.mdwn b/open_issues/glibc/octave.mdwn new file mode 100644 index 00000000..b12b7558 --- /dev/null +++ b/open_issues/glibc/octave.mdwn @@ -0,0 +1,35 @@ +[[!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]] + + +# IRC, OFTC, #debian-hurd, 2012-04-23 + + <pinotree> diffing the octave i386 vs hurd-i386 build logs gives + interesting surprises + <youpi> checking whether this system has an arbitrary file name length + limit... no | checking whether this system has an arbitrary + file name length limit... yes + <youpi> ? + <pinotree> not only that + <youpi> checking whether getcwd handles long file names properly... yes + | checking whether getcwd handles long file names properly... no, but it + is partly worki+ + <youpi> ? + <pinotree> -checking whether fdopendir works... yes + <pinotree> +checking whether fdopendir works... no + <pinotree> (- is i386, + is hurd-i386) + <pinotree> -checking whether getlogin_r works with small buffers... yes + <pinotree> +checking whether getlogin_r works with small buffers... no + <pinotree> -checking for working mkstemp... yes + <pinotree> +checking for working mkstemp... no + <pinotree> +checking for working nanosleep... no (mishandles large + arguments) diff --git a/open_issues/gnumach_memory_management.mdwn b/open_issues/gnumach_memory_management.mdwn index f8e27e62..9feb30c8 100644 --- a/open_issues/gnumach_memory_management.mdwn +++ b/open_issues/gnumach_memory_management.mdwn @@ -2116,3 +2116,20 @@ There is a [[!FF_project 266]][[!tag bounty]] on this task. remember) <braunr> use "physical" instead of "real memory" <mcsim> braunr: thank you. + + +# IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2012-04-22 + + <braunr> youpi: tschwinge: when the slab code was added, a few new files + made into gnumach that come from my git repo and are used in other + projects as well + <braunr> they're licensed under BSD upstream and GPL in gnumach, and though + it initially didn't disturb me, now it does + <braunr> i think i should fix this by leaving the original copyright and + adding the GPL on top + <youpi> sure, submit a patch + <braunr> hm i have direct commit acces if im right + <youpi> then fix it :) + <braunr> do you want to review ? + <youpi> I don't think there is any need to + <braunr> ok diff --git a/open_issues/gnumach_page_cache_policy.mdwn b/open_issues/gnumach_page_cache_policy.mdwn new file mode 100644 index 00000000..75fcdd88 --- /dev/null +++ b/open_issues/gnumach_page_cache_policy.mdwn @@ -0,0 +1,35 @@ +[[!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_gnumach]] + + +# IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2012-04-26 + + <braunr> another not-too-long improvement would be changing the page cache + policy + <youpi> to drop the 4000 objects limit, you mean ? + <braunr> yes + <youpi> do you still have my patch attempt ? + <braunr> no + <youpi> let me grab that + <braunr> oh i won't start it right away you know + <braunr> i'll ask for it when i do + <youpi> k + <braunr> (otherwise i fell i'll just loose it again eh) + <youpi> :) + <braunr> but i imagine it's not too hard to achieve + <youpi> yes + <braunr> i also imagine to set a large threshold of free pages to avoid + deadlocks + <braunr> which will still be better than the current situation where we + have either lots of free pages because tha max limit is reached, or lots + of pressure and system freezes :/ + <youpi> yes diff --git a/open_issues/gnumach_vm_map_red-black_trees.mdwn b/open_issues/gnumach_vm_map_red-black_trees.mdwn new file mode 100644 index 00000000..d77bea32 --- /dev/null +++ b/open_issues/gnumach_vm_map_red-black_trees.mdwn @@ -0,0 +1,142 @@ +[[!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_gnumach]] + + +# IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2012-04-23 + + <braunr> btw, i'm running a gnumach version using red-black trees for vm + map entries + <antrik> braunr: sounds fashionable ;-) + <youpi> braunr: with some perf improvement? + <braunr> looks promising for our ext2fs instances showing several thousands + of map entries + <braunr> youpi: i'm not using it for lookups yet + <braunr> but the tree is there, maintained, used for both regular and copy + maps, and it doesn't crash + <youpi> good :) + <braunr> antrik: isn't it ? :) + <braunr> youpi: and the diff stat is like 50/15 + <antrik> braunr: what's the goal of using the fashionable trees? + <braunr> antrik: speeding up lookups in address spaces + <antrik> braunr: so the idea is that if we have a heavily fragmented + address space, the performance penalty is smaller? + <braunr> yes + <antrik> OK + <antrik> I take it you gave up on attempts to actually decrease + fragmentation?... + <braunr> it's not as good as reducing fragmentation, which requires + implementing a powerful merge, but it's still better + <braunr> yes + <braunr> it's too messy for my brain :/ + <antrik> I see + <antrik> oh + <braunr> it will add some overhead though + <youpi> I guess log(n) ? + <braunr> but if there is a significant performance gain, it'll be worth it + <braunr> yes + <braunr> i was more thinking about the memory overhead + <antrik> right now it's a linear list? + <youpi> I don't think we care nowadays :) + <braunr> antrik: yes + <antrik> ouch + <braunr> antrik: yes ... :> + <braunr> the original authors expected vm maps to have like 30 entries + <braunr> so they used a list for the maps, and a hash table for the + object/offset to physical page lookups + <braunr> there is a small lookup cache though, which is a nice optimization + <braunr> my code now uses it first, and falls back to the RB tree if the + hint didn't help + <antrik> braunr: well, don't forget to check whether it actually *is* still + an optimisation, when using fashionable trees ;-) + <braunr> antrik: i checked that already :) + <braunr> i did the same in x15 + <antrik> I see + <braunr> both bsd and linux uses a similar technique + <braunr> use* + <braunr> (well, bsd actually use what is done in mach :) + <antrik> (or perhaps the other way around... ;-) ) + <braunr> i don't think so, as the bsd vm is really the mach vm + <braunr> but we don't care much + <antrik> oh, right... that part actually went full circle + <braunr> youpi: i have a patch ready for test on machines with significant + amounts of map entries (e.g. the buildds ..) + <braunr> youpi: i won't have time for tests tonight, are you interested ? + <braunr> (i've been running it for 15 minutes without any issue for now) + <youpi> I'd say post to the list + <braunr> ok + <youpi> braunr: your patch uses the rb tree for lookups, right? + <youpi> braunr: the buildd using rbtree seems swift + <youpi> but maybe it's just a psychologic effect :) + <youpi> the chroot ext2fs already has 1392 lines in vminfo + <youpi> an rbtree can't hurt there :) + <youpi> braunr: it really seems faster + <youpi> the reboot might have helped too + <youpi> benchmarks shall say + <youpi> for now, I'll just let ironforge use it + <antrik> youpi: it's always fast after a reboot ;-) + <youpi> sure + <youpi> but still + <youpi> I mean + <youpi> *obviously* the reboot has helped + <youpi> but it might not be all + <youpi> at least it feels so + <youpi> and obviously only benchmarks can say + <antrik> the major benefit AIUI is rather that the slowdown happening over + time will be less noticable + +[[performance/degradation]]. + + <youpi> "over time" is actually quite fast + <youpi> ext2 fills up very quickly when you build a package + <youpi> it went up to 1700 lines very quickly + <youpi> and stabilized around there + <antrik> yeah, it can be very fast under heavy load + <youpi> that's why I say reboot seems not all + <youpi> it's already not so fresh + <youpi> with 1700 lines in vminfo + <antrik> well, I don't know how much of the slowdown I'm experiencing + (after doing stuff under memory pressure) is actually related to VM map + fragmentation... + <antrik> might be all, might be none, might be something in between + <youpi> then try his patch + <antrik> guess I should play a bit with vminfo... + <antrik> well, currently I actually experience pretty little slowdown, as + for certain reasons (only indirectly related to the Hurd) I'm not running + mutt on this machine, so I don't really have memory pressure... + + +## IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2012-04-24 + + <braunr> youpi: yes, it uses bst lookups + <braunr> youpi: FYI, the last time i checked, one ext2fs instance had 4k+ + map entries, and another around 7.5k + <braunr> (on ironforge) + + +## IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2012-04-24 + + <youpi> braunr: $ sudo vminfo 624 | wc -l + <youpi> 22957 + <youpi> there's no way it can not help :) + <braunr> youpi: 23k, that's really huge + + +## IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2012-04-26 + + <braunr> youpi: any new numbers wrt the rbtree patch ? + <youpi> well, buildd times are not really accurate :) + <youpi> but what I can tell is that it managed to build qtwebkit fine + <braunr> ok + <youpi> so the patch is probably safe :) + <braunr> i'll commit it soon then + <youpi> I'd say feel free to, yes + <braunr> thanks diff --git a/open_issues/libpthread.mdwn b/open_issues/libpthread.mdwn index 614f1271..c5054b7f 100644 --- a/open_issues/libpthread.mdwn +++ b/open_issues/libpthread.mdwn @@ -1,4 +1,5 @@ -[[!meta copyright="Copyright © 2010, 2011 Free Software Foundation, Inc."]] +[[!meta copyright="Copyright © 2010, 2011, 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 @@ -25,43 +26,19 @@ There is a [[!FF_project 275]][[!tag bounty]] on this task. [[!inline pages=community/gsoc/project_ideas/pthreads feeds=no]] +## IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2012-04-26 -# pthread/stubs issue w/ dlopen'ed libraries + <pinotree> youpi: just to be sure: even if libpthread is compiled inside + glibc (with proper symbols forwarding etc), it doesn't change that you + cannot use both cthreads and pthreads in the same app, right? -IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2010-01-24 +[[Packaging_libpthread]]. - <pinotree> youpi: hm, thought about the pthread/stubs issue w/ dlopen'ed - libraries - <pinotree> currently looks like libstdc++ on hurd links to pthread-stubs, - we're the only one with such configuration - <pinotree> i was looking at the gcc 4.4 patch hurd-pthread.diff, could it - be it does not set THREADLIBS in the configure.ac switch case? - <youpi> that's expected - <youpi> on linux the libc provides hooks itself, on hurd-i386 it's - pthread-stubs - <pinotree> why not explicitly link to pthread though? - <youpi> because there is no strict need to, for applications that don't - need libpthread - <youpi> the dlopen case is a tricky case that pthread-stubs had not thought - about - <pinotree> hm - <pinotree> what if the pthread stubs would be moved in our glibc? - <youpi> that's what we should do yes - <youpi> (ideally) - <youpi> but for this we need to build libpthread along glibc, to get it - really working - <youpi> and that's the tricky part (Makefile & such) which hasn't been done - yet - <pinotree> why both (stubs + actual libpthread)? - <youpi> because you need the stubs to be able to call the actual libpthread - <youpi> as soon libpthread gets dlopened for instance - <youpi> +as - <pinotree> i see - <youpi> (remember that nptl does this if you want to see how) - <youpi> (it's the libc files in nptl/) - <youpi> (and forward.c) - <guillem> also if libpthreads gets integrated with glibc don't we need to - switch the hurd from cthreads then? Which has been the blocker all this - time AFAIR? - <youpi> we don't _need_ to - <guillem> ok + <youpi> it's the same libpthread + <youpi> symbol forwarding does not magically resolve that libpthread lacks + some libthread features :) + <pinotree> i know, i was referring about the clash between actively using + both + <youpi> there'll still be the issue that only one will be initialized + <youpi> and one that provides libc thread safety functions, etc. + <pinotree> that's what i wanted to knew, thanks :) diff --git a/open_issues/libpthread_CLOCK_MONOTONIC.mdwn b/open_issues/libpthread_CLOCK_MONOTONIC.mdwn new file mode 100644 index 00000000..f9195540 --- /dev/null +++ b/open_issues/libpthread_CLOCK_MONOTONIC.mdwn @@ -0,0 +1,58 @@ +[[!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]]."]]"""]] + +[[!meta title="libpthread: CLOCK_MONOTONIC"]] + +[[!tag open_issue_glibc open_issue_libpthread]] + +[[!message-id "201204220058.37328.toscano.pino@tiscali.it"]] + + +# IRC, freenode, #hurd- 2012-04-22 + + <pinotree> youpi: what i thought would be creating a + glib/hurd/hurdtime.{c,h}, adding _hurd_gettimeofday and + _hurd_clock_{gettime,settime,getres} to it and making the current .c in + sysdeps call those + <youpi> yep + <youpi> that's unfortunate, but that's what nptl actually does + <pinotree> this way we could add inside hurdtime.c the mapped time stuff + too + <pinotree> most probably a noobish question, but why does rt link to + pthread? + <youpi> no idea :) + <youpi> possibly due to aio implementation + <youpi> ./sysdeps/pthread/aio_cancel.c + <youpi> probably due to that + <youpi> (and others) + + +## IRC, freenode, #hurd- 2012-04-23 + + <youpi> pinotree: about librt vs libpthread, don't worry too much for now + <youpi> libpthread can lib against the already-installed librt + <youpi> it does work + <pinotree> youpi: wouldn't that cause a dependency loop? + <youpi> pinotree: what dependency loop? + <pinotree> youpi: librt wouldd link to pthread, no? + <youpi> and ? + <youpi> I don't think it's an issue that .so link with each other + <pinotree> it isn't? + <youpi> well, try + * pinotree never did that + <youpi> but I don't think it will pose problem + <youpi> well, perhaps initialization order + <youpi> anyway, I now have packages built, I'll test that + <youpi> pinotree: ok, it seems it doesn't work indeed :) + <youpi> early in initialization + <youpi> pinotree: the initialization bug might actually not be due to librt + at all + <youpi> pinotree: yes, things work even with -lrt + <pinotree> wow diff --git a/open_issues/libpthread_dlopen.mdwn b/open_issues/libpthread_dlopen.mdwn index fb665c67..05a07ef2 100644 --- a/open_issues/libpthread_dlopen.mdwn +++ b/open_issues/libpthread_dlopen.mdwn @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@ -[[!meta copyright="Copyright © 2011 Free Software Foundation, Inc."]] +[[!meta copyright="Copyright © 2011, 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 @@ -10,7 +10,52 @@ License|/fdl]]."]]"""]] [[!tag open_issue_libpthread]] -IRC, OFTC, #debian-hurd, 2011-07-21. +[[!toc]] + + +# IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2010-01-24 + + <pinotree> youpi: hm, thought about the pthread/stubs issue w/ dlopen'ed + libraries + <pinotree> currently looks like libstdc++ on hurd links to pthread-stubs, + we're the only one with such configuration + <pinotree> i was looking at the gcc 4.4 patch hurd-pthread.diff, could it + be it does not set THREADLIBS in the configure.ac switch case? + <youpi> that's expected + <youpi> on linux the libc provides hooks itself, on hurd-i386 it's + pthread-stubs + <pinotree> why not explicitly link to pthread though? + <youpi> because there is no strict need to, for applications that don't + need libpthread + <youpi> the dlopen case is a tricky case that pthread-stubs had not thought + about + <pinotree> hm + <pinotree> what if the pthread stubs would be moved in our glibc? + <youpi> that's what we should do yes + <youpi> (ideally) + <youpi> but for this we need to build libpthread along glibc, to get it + really working + +[[Packaging_libpthread]]. + + <youpi> and that's the tricky part (Makefile & such) which hasn't been done + yet + <pinotree> why both (stubs + actual libpthread)? + <youpi> because you need the stubs to be able to call the actual libpthread + <youpi> as soon libpthread gets dlopened for instance + <youpi> +as + <pinotree> i see + <youpi> (remember that nptl does this if you want to see how) + <youpi> (it's the libc files in nptl/) + <youpi> (and forward.c) + <guillem> also if libpthreads gets integrated with glibc don't we need to + switch the hurd from cthreads then? Which has been the blocker all this + time AFAIR? + <youpi> we don't _need_ to + <guillem> ok + + +# IRC, OFTC, #debian-hurd, 2011-07-21 <youpi> there's one known issue with pthreads <youpi> you can't dlopen() it diff --git a/open_issues/o_exec.mdwn b/open_issues/o_exec.mdwn new file mode 100644 index 00000000..3f77a0f2 --- /dev/null +++ b/open_issues/o_exec.mdwn @@ -0,0 +1,54 @@ +[[!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]]."]]"""]] + +[[!meta title="O_EXEC"]] + +[[!tag open_issue_glibc open_issue_hurd]] + + +# IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2012-04-24 + + <pinotree> interesting, glibc on every OS except hurd (so including linux + too) does not define O_EXEC + <pinotree> can somebody please help me understand a POSIX behaviour? + <pinotree> it's about fexecve: + http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/functions/fexecve.html + <pinotree> basically, it seems to me (reading the "errors" and "application + usage" sections) that O_EXEC for open() the fd is not mandatory, and if + not used fexecve will check for file permission at call time? + <pinotree> because currently libdiskfs and libnetfs require the fd to be + open with O_EXEC + <braunr> "Since execute permission is checked by fexecve(), the file + description fd need not have been opened with the O_EXEC flag" + <braunr> this one makes it clear checking for O_EXEC is wrong + <braunr> it looks like O_EXEC is only needed when you want to have files + for which only the execution permission is set + <braunr> but not the read one + <braunr> (i don't understand the "and write" part though) + <braunr> "exec will fail if the mode of the file associated with fd does + not grant execute permission to the calling process at the time fexecve() + is called." + <braunr> this one strengthens the impression you have, that fexecve indeed + checks file permissions at the time it's called + <braunr> pinotree: hope it helps + <pinotree> so it implies the following: + <pinotree> O_RDONLY → exec works if the file is readable + <braunr> exec works if the file is readable and/or executable (although + without read permissions you can't check it) + <braunr> (well, fexecve) + <pinotree> O_EXEC → exec requires that the permission of the file at + fexecve() time have +x + <braunr> i'd say ye so far + <braunr> yes + <pinotree> so we need to fix lib{disk,net}fs then + <braunr> seems so + <pinotree> enlighting, merci braunr + <braunr> de rien + <pinotree> :) diff --git a/open_issues/packaging_libpthread.mdwn b/open_issues/packaging_libpthread.mdwn index fa3d4312..f8ef4ae7 100644 --- a/open_issues/packaging_libpthread.mdwn +++ b/open_issues/packaging_libpthread.mdwn @@ -1,4 +1,5 @@ -[[!meta copyright="Copyright © 2010, 2011 Free Software Foundation, Inc."]] +[[!meta copyright="Copyright © 2010, 2011, 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 @@ -10,9 +11,13 @@ License|/fdl]]."]]"""]] [[!tag open_issue_libpthread open_issue_glibc]] -IRC, #hurd, 2010-07-31 +[[!toc]] - <tschwinge> My idea was to have a separate libpthread package. What do you think about that? + +# IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2010-07-31 + + <tschwinge> My idea was to have a separate libpthread package. What do you + think about that? <youpi> in the long term, that can't work with glibc <youpi> because of the thread stub stuff @@ -21,30 +26,103 @@ IRC, #hurd, 2010-07-31 <youpi> it's not really possible to keep synchronized <youpi> because you have to decide which package you unpack first <youpi> (when upgrading) - <tschwinge> Hmm, how is that different if two shared libraries are in one package vs. two packages? It isn't atomic either way? Aren't sonames / versioned library packages solving that? + <tschwinge> Hmm, how is that different if two shared libraries are in one + package vs. two packages? It isn't atomic either way? Aren't sonames / + versioned library packages solving that? <tschwinge> ... for incompatible forward changes? <youpi> that'd be a mess to maintain - <youpi> Drepper doesn't have this constraint and thus adds members of private fields at will - <tschwinge> OK, but how is it different then if the libpthread is in the Hurd package? + <youpi> Drepper doesn't have this constraint and thus adds members of + private fields at will + <tschwinge> OK, but how is it different then if the libpthread is in the + Hurd package? <youpi> I'm not saying it's better to have libpthread in the Hurd package <tschwinge> OK. - <youpi> I'm saying it's useless to package it separately when Drepper makes everything to have us put it along glibc + <youpi> I'm saying it's useless to package it separately when Drepper makes + everything to have us put it along glibc <tschwinge> Then, to goal is to have it in glibc? <tschwinge> OK. :-) - <tschwinge> OK, I can accommodate to that. Isn't not that we'd want to switch libpthread to something else so quickly. - <tschwinge> So our official goal is to have libpthread in glibc, at least for Debian purposese? + <tschwinge> OK, I can accommodate to that. Isn't not that we'd want to + switch libpthread to something else so quickly. + <tschwinge> So our official goal is to have libpthread in glibc, at least + for Debian purposese? <youpi> for any port purpose <tschwinge> Ack. - <youpi> provided you're using glibc, you're deemed to ship libpthread with it + <youpi> provided you're using glibc, you're deemed to ship libpthread with + it <youpi> because of the strong relations Drepper puts between them - <youpi> (just to remind: we already have bugs just because our current libpthread isn't bound enough to glibc: dlopen()ing a library depending on libpthread doesn't work, for instance) - <pinotree> yeah, pthread-stubs is linked to almost everywhere -lpthread isn't used + <youpi> (just to remind: we already have bugs just because our current + libpthread isn't bound enough to glibc: dlopen()ing a library depending + on libpthread doesn't work, for instance) + <pinotree> yeah, pthread-stubs is linked to almost everywhere -lpthread + isn't used <pinotree> (would be nice to not have those issues anymore...) - <tschwinge> So -- what do we need to put it into glibc? We can make libpthread a Git submodule (or move the code; but it's shared also for Neal's viengoos, so perhaps the submodule is better?), plus some glibc make foo, plus some other adaptions (stubs, etc.) - <tschwinge> Does that sound about right, or am I missing something fundamental? + <tschwinge> So -- what do we need to put it into glibc? We can make + libpthread a Git submodule (or move the code; but it's shared also for + Neal's viengoos, so perhaps the submodule is better?), plus some glibc + make foo, plus some other adaptions (stubs, etc.) + <tschwinge> Does that sound about right, or am I missing something + fundamental? <youpi> I actually don't know what a git submodule permits :) <youpi> looks like a good thing for this, yes - <tschwinge> Unfortunately I can't allocate much time at the moment to work on this. :-/ - <youpi> well, as long as I know where we're going, I can know how to package stuff in Debian - <tschwinge> That sounds like a plan to me. libpthread -> glibc as submodule. - <youpi> (note: actually, the interface between glibc and the libpthread is the responsibility of the libpthread: it gives a couple of .c files to be shipped in libc.so) + <tschwinge> Unfortunately I can't allocate much time at the moment to work + on this. :-/ + <youpi> well, as long as I know where we're going, I can know how to + package stuff in Debian + <tschwinge> That sounds like a plan to me. libpthread -> glibc as + submodule. + <youpi> (note: actually, the interface between glibc and the libpthread is + the responsibility of the libpthread: it gives a couple of .c files to be + shipped in libc.so) + + +# IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2012-04-21 + + <youpi> had you tried to build libpthread as a glibc addon? + <tschwinge> youpi: No, I only know about libpthread in Hurd build system, + and libpthread stand-alone (with the Auto* stuff that I added), but not + yet as a glibc add-on. + <youpi> k + <youpi> I'm trying it atm + <tschwinge> Oh, OK. + <youpi> that should fix the no-add-needed issue in gcc/binutils, as well as + the pthread_threads assertion errors in threaded plugins + <youpi> (once I add forward.c, but that part should not be hard) + <pinotree> that means also less use of pthread-stubs^ + <pinotree> ? + <youpi> tschwinge: do you remember whether sysdeps/mach/bits/spin* are used + by anybody? + <youpi> they are half-finished (no __PTHREAD_SPIN_LOCK_INITIALIZER), and + come in the way when building in glibc + <youpi> also, any reason for using ia32 and not i386? glibc uses the latter + <youpi> pinotree: rid of pthread-stubs yes + <pinotree> \o/ + <tschwinge> youpi: You mean sysdeps/mach/i386/machine-lock.h? No idea + about that one, sorry. + <youpi> I'm talking about libpthread + <youpi> not glibc + <tschwinge> Oh. + <tschwinge> sysdeps/ia32/bits/spin-lock.h:# define + __PTHREAD_SPIN_LOCK_INITIALIZER ((__pthread_spinlock_t) 0) + <tschwinge> Anyway, no idea about that either. + <youpi> that one is meant to be used with the spin-lock.h just below + <youpi> +-inline + <youpi> also, I guess signal/ was for the l4 port? + <tschwinge> youpi: I guess so. + <youpi> tschwinge: I have an issue with sysdeps pt files: + sysdeps/hurd/pt-getspecific.c is not looked for by libc ; symlinking into + sysdeps/mach/hurd/pt-getspecific.c works + <youpi> we don't have a non-mach sysdeps directory? + <pinotree> youpi: if you add sysdeps/mach/hurd/Implies containing only + "hurd", does sysdeps/hurd work? + <youpi> ah, right + <pinotree> youpi: did it work? (and, it was needed in sysdeps/mach/hurd, or + in libpthread/sysdeps/mach/hurd?) + <youpi> pinotree: it worked, it was for libpthread + <youpi> good: I got libpthread built and forward working + + +## IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2012-04-23 + + <youpi> phew + <youpi> confirmed that moving libpthread to glibc fixes the gcc/binutils + no-add-needed issue diff --git a/open_issues/system_call_mechanism.mdwn b/open_issues/system_call_mechanism.mdwn index 5598148c..68418097 100644 --- a/open_issues/system_call_mechanism.mdwn +++ b/open_issues/system_call_mechanism.mdwn @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@ -[[!meta copyright="Copyright © 2011 Free Software Foundation, Inc."]] +[[!meta copyright="Copyright © 2011, 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 @@ -10,8 +10,47 @@ License|/fdl]]."]]"""]] [[!tag open_issue_gnumach]] -IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2011-05-07 +[[!toc]] + + +# IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2011-05-07 <braunr> very simple examples: system calls use old call gates, which are the slowest path to kernel space <braunr> modern processors have dedicated instructions now + + +# IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2012-04-22 + + <braunr> rah: basically, system calls are slower on mach because they use + call gates instead of newer sysenter/sysexit + <youpi> braunr: sysenter/exit is a x86_64 thing + <braunr> rah: apart from that, the code can't get much simpler, and *I* + know, for i have studied it, and wrote a compatible version in a clone + attempt + <youpi> braunr: on a x86_64 port we'd probably use sysenter/exit + <braunr> youpi: no there are 32-bits instructions, i don't remember if + they're called sysenter, it's in my thesis though so i'm sure of it :) + <youpi> braunr: ah, the other part + <youpi> is linux-x86 using them? + <braunr> youpi: yes, glibc uses them + <youpi> and does it really change much nowadays? + <youpi> what is the actual difference between int 80 and sysenter? + <braunr> less checking + <youpi> checking what? + <youpi> the idt? + <braunr> ring levels for example + <youpi> well, checking a ring is fast :) + <braunr> depending on the original and requested levels, there are lookups + in tables + <braunr> sysenter always assume 3 to 0 and 0 to 3 for sysexit + <youpi> ah, also it assumes things about segments + <youpi> so that indeed makes context things simpler + <braunr> right + <braunr> but mach doesn't uses int 0x80 + <braunr> it uses an lcall + <braunr> which is a bit slower from what I could read some time ago + <braunr> (not sure if it's still relevant) + <youpi> actually in 64bit mode I had to catch lcall from the invalid + instruction trap + <youpi> perhaps it got dropped in 64bit mode diff --git a/open_issues/user-space_device_drivers.mdwn b/open_issues/user-space_device_drivers.mdwn index 70c3c6dc..25168fce 100644 --- a/open_issues/user-space_device_drivers.mdwn +++ b/open_issues/user-space_device_drivers.mdwn @@ -1,4 +1,5 @@ -[[!meta copyright="Copyright © 2009, 2011 Free Software Foundation, Inc."]] +[[!meta copyright="Copyright © 2009, 2011, 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 @@ -64,7 +65,7 @@ Also see [[device drivers and IO systems]]. ## System Boot -IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2011-07-27 +### IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2011-07-27 < braunr> btw, was there any formulation of the modifications required to have disk drivers in userspace ? @@ -88,6 +89,11 @@ IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2011-07-27 < Tekk_> mhm < braunr> s/disk/storage/ +### IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2012-04-25 + + <youpi> btw, remember the initrd thing? + <youpi> I just came across task.c in libstore/ :) + # Plan |