diff --git a/src/runtime/c/doc/README.md b/src/runtime/c/doc/README.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..298647f5a --- /dev/null +++ b/src/runtime/c/doc/README.md @@ -0,0 +1,14 @@ +# The Hacker's Guide to GF + +This is the hacker's guide to GF, for the guide to the galaxy, see the full edition [here](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hitchhiker%27s_Guide_to_the_Galaxy). +Here we will limit outselves to the vastly narrower domain of the [GF](https://www.grammaticalframework.org) runtime. This means that we will not meet +any [Vogons](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vogon), but we will touch upon topics like memory management, databases, transactions, compilers, +functional programming, theorem proving and sometimes even languages. Subjects that no doubt would interest any curious hacker. + +So, **Don't Panick!** and keep reading. This is a live document and will develop together with the runtime itself. + +**TABLE OF CONTENTS** + +1. [Desiderata](DESIDERATA.md) +2. [Memory Model](memory_model.md) + diff --git a/src/runtime/c/doc/memory_model.md b/src/runtime/c/doc/memory_model.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..33eb96ae3 --- /dev/null +++ b/src/runtime/c/doc/memory_model.md @@ -0,0 +1,126 @@ +# The different storage files + +The purpose of the .ngf files is to be used as on disk databases that store grammars. Their format is platform dependent and they should not be copied from +one platform to another. In contrast the .pgf files are platform independent and can be moved around. The runtime can import a .pgf file and create an .ngf file. +Conversely a .pgf file can be exported from an already existing .ngf file. + +The internal relation between the two file is more interesting. The runtime uses its own memory allocator which always allocates memory from a memory mapped file. +The file may be explicit or an annonymous one. The .ngf is simply a memory image saved in a file. This means that loading the file is always immediate. +You just create a new mapping and the kernel will load memory pages on demand. + +On the other hand a .pgf file is a version of the grammar serialized in a platform independent format. This means that loading this type of file is always slower. +Fortunately, you can always create an .ngf file from it to speedup later reloads. + +The runtime has three ways to load a grammar: + +* loading a .pgf: +```Haskell +readPGF :: FilePath -> IO PGF +``` +This loads the .pgf into an annonymous memory mapped file. In practice, this means that instead of allocating memory from an explicit file, the runtime will still +use the normal swap file. + +* loading a .pgf and booting a new .ngf: +```Haskell +bootPGF :: FilePath -> FilePath -> IO PGF +``` +The grammar is loaded from a .pgf (the first argument) and the memory is mapped to an explicit .ngf (second argument). The .ngf file is created by the function +and a file with the same name should not exist before the call. + +* loading an existing memory image: +```Haskell +readNGF :: FilePath -> IO PGF +``` +Once an .ngf file exists, it can be mapped back to memory by using this function. This call is always guaranteed to be fast. The same function can also +create new empty .ngf files. If the file does not exist, then a new one will be created which contains an empty grammar. The grammar could then be extended +by dynamically adding functions and categories. + +# The content of an .ngf file + +The .ngf file is a memory image but this is not the end of the story. The problem is that there is no way to control at which address the memory image would be +mapped. On Posix systems, `mmap` takes as hint the mapping address but the kernel may choose to ignore it. There is also the flag MAP_FIXED, which makes the hint +into a constraint, but then the kernel may fail to satisfy the constraint. For example that address may already be used for something else. Furthermore, if the +same file is mapped from several processes (if they all load the same grammar), it would be difficult to find an address which is free in all of them. +Last but not least using `MAP_FIXED` is considered a security risk. + +Since the start address of the mapping can change, using traditional memory pointers withing the mapped area is not possible. The only option is to use offsets +relative to the beginning of the area. In other words, if normally we would have written `p->x`, now we have the offset `o` which we must use like this: +```C++ +((A*) (current_base+o))->x +``` + +Writing the explicit pointer arithmetics and typecasts, each time when we dereference a pointer, is not better than Vogon poetry and it +becomes worse when using a chain of arrow operators. The solution is to use the operator overloading in C++. +There is the type `ref` which wraps around a file offset to a data item of type `A`. The operators `->` and `*` +are overloaded for the type and they do the necessary pointer arithmetics and type casts. + +This solves the problem with code readability but creates another problem. How do `->` and `*` know the address of the memory mapped area? Obviously, +`current_base` must be a static variable and there must be a way to initialize that variable. + +A database (a memory mapped file) in the runtime is represented by the type `DB`. Before any of the data in the database is accessed, the database must +be brought into scope. Bringing into scope means that `current_base` is initialized to point to the mapping area for that database. After that any dereferencing +of a reference will be done relative to the corresponding database. This is how scopes are defined: +```C++ +{ + DB_scope scope(db, READER_SCOPE); + ... +} +``` +Here `DB_scope` is a helper type and `db` is a pointer to the database that you want to bring into scope. The constructor for `DB_scope` saves the old value +for `current_base` and then sets it to point to the area of the given database. Conversely the destructor, restores the previous value. + +The use of `DB_scope` is reentrant, i.e. you can do this: +```C++ +{ + DB_scope scope(db1, READER_SCOPE); + ... + { + DB_scope scope(db2, READER_SCOPE); + ... + } + ... +} +``` +What you can't do is to have more than one database in scope simultaneously. Fortunately, that is not needed. All API functions start a scope +and the internals of the runtime always work with the current database in scope. + +Note the flag `READER_SCOPE`. You can use either `READER_SCOPE` or `WRITER_SCOPE`. In addition to selecting the database, the DB_scope also enforces, +the single writer, multiple readers policy. The main problem is that a writer may have to enlarge the current file, which consequently may mean +that the kernel should relocate the mapping area to a new address. If there are readers at the same time, they way break since they expect that the mapped +area is at a particular location. + +# Developing Writers + +There is one important complication when developing procedures modifying the database. Every call to `DB::malloc` may potentially have to enlarge the mapped area +which sometimes leads to changing `current_base`. That would not have been a problem if GCC was not sometimes caching variables in registers. Look at the following code: +```C++ +p->r = foo(); +``` +Here `p` is a reference which is used to access another reference `r`. On the other hand, `foo()` is a procedure which directly or indirectly calls `DB::malloc`. +GCC compiles assignments by first computing the address to modify, and then it evaluates the right hand side. This means that while `foo()` is beeing evaluated the address computed on the left-hand side is saved in a register or somewhere in the stack. But now, if it happens that the allocation in `foo()` has changed +`current_base`, then the saved address is no longer valid. + +That first problem is solved by overloading the assignment operator for `ref`: +```C++ +ref& operator= (const ref& r) { + offset = r.offset; + return *this; +} +``` +On a first sight, nothing special happens here and it looks like the overloading is redundant. However, now the assignments are compiled in a very different way. +The overloaded operator is inlined, so there is no real method call and we don't get any overhead. The real difference is that now, whatever is on the left-hand side of the assignment becomes the value of the `this` pointer, and `this` is always the last thing to be evaluated in a method call. This solves the problem. +`foo()` is evaluated first and if it changes `current_base`, the change will be taken into account when computing the left-hand side of the assignment. + +Unfortunately, this is not the only problem. A similar thing happens when the arguments of a function are calls to other functions. See this: +```C++ +foo(p->r,bar(),q->r) +``` +Where now `bar()` is the function that do allocation. The compiler is free to keep in a register the value of `current_base` that it needs for the evaluation of +`p->r`, while it evaluates `bar()`. But if `current_base` has changed, then the saved value would be invalid while computing `q->r`. There doesn't seem to be +a work around for this. The only solution is to: + +**Never call a function that allocates as an argument to another function** + +Instead we call allocating functions on a separate line and we save the result in a temporary variable. + +