diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'community')
| -rw-r--r-- | community/gsoc/2013/nlightnfotis.mdwn | 15 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | community/gsoc/project_ideas/object_lookups.mdwn | 63 |
2 files changed, 78 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/community/gsoc/2013/nlightnfotis.mdwn b/community/gsoc/2013/nlightnfotis.mdwn index a9176f51..83e97bc7 100644 --- a/community/gsoc/2013/nlightnfotis.mdwn +++ b/community/gsoc/2013/nlightnfotis.mdwn @@ -3035,3 +3035,18 @@ But not the [[open_issues/libpthread_dlopen]] issue? <nlightnfotis> and we wanna prove that go violates this rule right? That the stack pointer is not pointing at the initial stack <braunr> yes + + +# IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2013-10-09 + + <gnu_srs> braunr: The crash is not in the assembly code, but in the called + function from it: + <gnu_srs> pthread_sigmask (how=2, set=0xf9cac <server_block_set>, + oset=oset@entry=0x0) at ./pthread/pt-sigmask.c:29 + <gnu_srs> 29 struct __pthread *self = _pthread_self (); + <gnu_srs> Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault. + <braunr> gnu_srs: ok so, same problem as in gcc go + <braunr> changing the stack pointer prevents libpthread from correctly + fetching thread-specific data (including _pthread_self()) correctly + <braunr> this will be fixed when threadvards are finally replaced with true + tls diff --git a/community/gsoc/project_ideas/object_lookups.mdwn b/community/gsoc/project_ideas/object_lookups.mdwn index 88ffc633..ca586dea 100644 --- a/community/gsoc/project_ideas/object_lookups.mdwn +++ b/community/gsoc/project_ideas/object_lookups.mdwn @@ -69,3 +69,66 @@ In context of [[!message-id "20130918081345.GA13789@dalaran.sceen.net"]]. <neal> braunr: That's called protected payload. <neal> braunr: The idea is that the kernel appends data to the message in flight. + + +## IRC, freenode, #hurd, 2013-10-24 + + <teythoon> and, with some effort, getting rid of the hash table lookup by + letting the kernel provide the address of the object (iirc neil knew the + proper term for that) + <braunr> teythoon: that is a big interface change + <teythoon> how so + <braunr> optimizing libihash and libpthread should already be a good start + <braunr> well how do you intend to add this information ? + <braunr> ok, "big" is overstatement, but still, it's a low level interface + change that would probably break a lot of things + <teythoon> store a pointer in the port structure in gnumach, make that + accessible somehow + <braunr> yes but how ? + <teythoon> interesting question indeed + <braunr> my plan for x15 is to make this "label" part of received messages + <braunr> which means you need to change the format of messages + <braunr> that is what i call a big change + <teythoon> ok, so we need to provide an update path + <teythoon> but once done, the change to hurd will be minimal, patching + libports should cover most of that + <braunr> normally yes + <teythoon> so this amounts to messing with gnumach and mig and designing a + clever way to make the update process safe + + <braunr> libihash is known to show high collision rates + <teythoon> right, libihash + <teythoon> it could use an integer hash function on the keys to distribute + them better + <braunr> i think that's already what it tries to do + <braunr> so merely using a better hash algorithm such as murmur should do + the job + <braunr> or use another data structure altogether + <teythoon> no, it does no hashing of its own on the keys + <braunr> are you sure ? + <teythoon> well, it uses only prime numbers as sizes, and computes key % + size + <braunr> well that's hashing .. :) + <teythoon> but this is not really a good hash + <braunr> yes + <braunr> isn't that what i said ? + <teythoon> right + <teythoon> ok, I didn't get that ;) + <teythoon> also, the sizes start quite small, 3, 7, 19... + <teythoon> and each time the hash table is grown, all items will have to be + updated + <braunr> which is why we could consider another data structure + <teythoon> or, for starters, to thin out that list of sizes + <braunr> my personal preference being radix trees + <teythoon> I assume you have an implementation handy? + <braunr> yes + <teythoon> cool :D + <braunr> but good hashing is excellent too + <braunr> radix trees have their own issues + <teythoon> braunr: http://burtleburtle.net/bob/hash/integer.html + <braunr> i use thomas wang's hashing function in x15 + <braunr> or rather, my own personal c utility library, since x15 doesn't + hash anything currently + <braunr> but murmur is better + <braunr> we prefer distribution over hashing performances + <braunr> https://131002.net/siphash/ |