Poster | Thread |
gonegahgah
| |
SMP and Forbid together? Posted on 26-Jan-2018 3:38:35
| | [ #1 ] |
|
|
|
Regular Member |
Joined: 5-Dec-2008 Posts: 148
From: Australia | | |
|
| I don't know the fullness of the problem. Perhaps someone(s) can helpfully repeat these around my questions...
Could you allow a certain amount of memory to be set aside for legacy apps? Via a preference option or something? New SMP apps would then only access the remainder memory?
New SMP safe apps call only new SMP safe functions... Legacy apps still call Forbid/Enable using functions...
Where a shared resource needs to be used by legacy and SMP safe apps... Could the legacy library functions then oncall SMP functions?
Forbid/Enable takes over completely which is a pain... Can it be made to only stop old legacy apps? Could SMP safe apps still operate while that is happening?
What obstacles to the above remain when memory is taken out of the equation? Am curious to learn... |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
ilbarbax
| |
Re: SMP and Forbid together? Posted on 26-Jan-2018 12:34:19
| | [ #2 ] |
|
|
|
Regular Member |
Joined: 17-Jan-2010 Posts: 184
From: Italy | | |
|
| |
Status: Offline |
|
|
BSzili
| |
Re: SMP and Forbid together? Posted on 26-Jan-2018 13:02:26
| | [ #3 ] |
|
|
|
Regular Member |
Joined: 16-Nov-2013 Posts: 447
From: Unknown | | |
|
| |
Status: Offline |
|
|
Hypex
| |
Re: SMP and Forbid together? Posted on 26-Jan-2018 14:05:32
| | [ #4 ] |
|
|
|
Elite Member |
Joined: 6-May-2007 Posts: 11180
From: Greensborough, Australia | | |
|
| @gonegahgah
Quote:
Could you allow a certain amount of memory to be set aside for legacy apps? |
IIRC the real 68K legacy apps have 64MB to play with.
Quote:
New SMP apps would then only access the remainder memory? |
The problem cascades now. Since there is also native legacy apps. To go beyond this we need a new API and with it new or recompiled apps.
Quote:
Could the legacy library functions then oncall SMP functions? |
In theory they could but might be best to sandbox these legacy apps. Even if there was a smp.resource.
Quote:
Forbid/Enable takes over completely which is a pain... |
But Disable/Enable is worse.
Quote:
What obstacles to the above remain when memory is taken out of the equation? |
Running the code somewhere.
I suupose the problem is also that forbidding was specified for certain operations. Such as protecting memory. And also accessing OS structures or user created system structures.Last edited by Hypex on 27-Jan-2018 at 03:11 PM.
|
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
RodTerl
| |
Re: SMP and Forbid together? Posted on 26-Jan-2018 15:13:41
| | [ #5 ] |
|
|
|
Cult Member |
Joined: 6-Sep-2004 Posts: 589
From: Rossendale | | |
|
| @Hypex
Why cripple an ultra responsive system like AOS with having to wait for all the cores to synchronise and respond, when its event horizon is so short that even cores on the same die might as well be totally asynchronous nodes on a network, controlled by message passing?
Or are CPUs just not designed to run efficintly like that, each core cooperative communicating?
How does it boot up? always starts at Core Zero, which therefore sets the overall asymetry?
There is already ArexxDeamon on Aminet that alows you to stream arexx calls from one core to another over a network, is this what Hyperion has been equivalent working on for ASMP, a Beowulf cluster, or intent?
_________________ The older and more respected a scientist is, the longer it takes to prove him wrong. |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
tonyw
| |
Re: SMP and Forbid together? Posted on 26-Jan-2018 22:09:27
| | [ #6 ] |
|
|
|
Elite Member |
Joined: 8-Mar-2003 Posts: 3240
From: Sydney (of course) | | |
|
| We recognised long ago that Forbid/Permit could, in most cases, be replaced by a simple semaphore or Mutex. One of the developer rules since then has been "No Forbid/Permit, use a Mutex or a semaphore if you must."
IIRC, most of the system software has been updated to use Mutexes instead of Forbid/Permit. Some older legacy stuff has been left unchanged, but all new stuff uses the new paradigm (whatever a paradigm is).
The aim is to make Forbid/Permit a no-op in future Exec versions. Only legacy apps would call it and their version of P/F would be minimal anyway.
_________________ cheers tony
Hyperion Support Forum: http://forum.hyperion-entertainment.biz/index.php |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
Hypex
| |
Re: SMP and Forbid together? Posted on 27-Jan-2018 15:33:40
| | [ #7 ] |
|
|
|
Elite Member |
Joined: 6-May-2007 Posts: 11180
From: Greensborough, Australia | | |
|
| @RodTerl
Quote:
Why cripple an ultra responsive system like AOS with having to wait for all the cores to synchronise and respond, when its event horizon is so short that even cores on the same die might as well be totally asynchronous nodes on a network, controlled by message passing? |
For one thing the alternative is to run the OS and apps on only one core and cripple the total performance of the hardware. But in any case when other cores want to access memory another core is using they have to wait anyway. And right now message passing is structure passing so it is locked to sender and receiver. Another one of those symbiotic relationships that exist in AmigaOS.
But AmigaOS isn't always ultra responsive. It can be easily brought down. A task can go crazy and suck its quantum which despite being time sliced between tasks will drag the system down. So being able to detect useless busy loops would be good to since the system can be almost brought to a halt. And go ultra unresponsive.
Quote:
Or are CPUs just not designed to run efficintly like that, each core cooperative communicating? |
They are designed for an OS that can make use of all cores.
Quote:
How does it boot up? always starts at Core Zero, which therefore sets the overall asymetry? |
I would say so. Then as tasks are added they would distributed across the cores. It makes sense to keep related tasks and child processes to the same core. Of course there is Exec itself, but the core of Exec runs as an interrupt, as manages all the tasks. Aside from system functions that run on the calling task context.
Quote:
There is already ArexxDeamon on Aminet that alows you to stream arexx calls from one core to another over a network, is this what Hyperion has been equivalent working on for ASMP, a Beowulf cluster, or intent? |
That's interesting. Render farms probably worked the same way. I would say it would be deeper. The Beowulf cluster has a seperation of components. So, to work the same way, seperate instances of AmigaOS and apps would need to be running on all cores. Likely memory would need to be split. So what Hyperion would be working on is a more direct method of SMP closer to common models. But the networking SMP idea is interesting. Last edited by Hypex on 28-Jan-2018 at 12:58 PM. Last edited by Hypex on 27-Jan-2018 at 03:39 PM.
|
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
Tomppeli
| |
Re: SMP and Forbid together? Posted on 27-Jan-2018 15:56:26
| | [ #8 ] |
|
|
|
Super Member |
Joined: 18-Jun-2004 Posts: 1652
From: Home land of Santa, sauna, sisu and salmiakki | | |
|
| @RodTerl
Quote:
There is already ArexxDeamon on Aminet |
I couldn't find any ArexxDaemon's from AmiNet ! ???_________________ Rock lobster bit me. My Workbench has always preferences. X1000 + AmigaOS4.1 FE "Anyone can build a fast CPU. The trick is to build a fast system." -Seymour Cray |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
broadblues
| |
Re: SMP and Forbid together? Posted on 27-Jan-2018 16:02:48
| | [ #9 ] |
|
|
|
Amiga Developer Team |
Joined: 20-Jul-2004 Posts: 4446
From: Portsmouth England | | |
|
| |
Status: Offline |
|
|
number6
| |
Re: SMP and Forbid together? Posted on 27-Jan-2018 16:14:23
| | [ #10 ] |
|
|
|
Elite Member |
Joined: 25-Mar-2005 Posts: 11540
From: In the village | | |
|
| @broadblues
Search under correct spelling perhaps? "daemon", not "deamon"
#6
_________________ This posting, in its entirety, represents solely the perspective of the author. *Secrecy has served us so well* |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
broadblues
| |
Re: SMP and Forbid together? Posted on 27-Jan-2018 16:35:02
| | [ #11 ] |
|
|
|
Amiga Developer Team |
Joined: 20-Jul-2004 Posts: 4446
From: Portsmouth England | | |
|
| |
Status: Offline |
|
|
number6
| |
Re: SMP and Forbid together? Posted on 27-Jan-2018 16:40:25
| | [ #12 ] |
|
|
|
Elite Member |
Joined: 25-Mar-2005 Posts: 11540
From: In the village | | |
|
| @broadblues
You could try posting to Rod on a.org. He also spends time in amiga.org irc.
#6
_________________ This posting, in its entirety, represents solely the perspective of the author. *Secrecy has served us so well* |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
broadblues
| |
Re: SMP and Forbid together? Posted on 27-Jan-2018 16:45:14
| | [ #13 ] |
|
|
|
Amiga Developer Team |
Joined: 20-Jul-2004 Posts: 4446
From: Portsmouth England | | |
|
| @number6
I might if he doesn't revisit this thread, a wider google search shows only reference to ARexxDeamon, by rod himself in this forum in 2009.
Starting to think it maybe one of his techofantasies, but the concept is something I've been thinking of implmenting. Thought there are obvious security issues.
BTW Aplogies to the OP for going completely OT
_________________ BroadBlues On Blues BroadBlues On Amiga Walker Broad |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
number6
| |
Re: SMP and Forbid together? Posted on 27-Jan-2018 16:47:52
| | [ #14 ] |
|
|
|
Elite Member |
Joined: 25-Mar-2005 Posts: 11540
From: In the village | | |
|
| @broadblues
Here's what you need if you go over there to lurk. heh.
Network Name: SynIRC Channel Name: #amiga.org
#6
_________________ This posting, in its entirety, represents solely the perspective of the author. *Secrecy has served us so well* |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
Deniil715
| |
Re: SMP and Forbid together? Posted on 28-Jan-2018 13:28:15
| | [ #15 ] |
|
|
|
Elite Member |
Joined: 14-May-2003 Posts: 4236
From: Sweden | | |
|
| @tonyw
Do betatester run on SMP AmigaOS now? If not, why? Is there really that much more problems?
IMO it doesn't have to be perfect, like having a "gold certified" load balancer. Why not just spread tasks around a'la round-robin and hope chance places them good. *For a start!*
Perhaps keep Petunia on core 0 if 68k is problematic. I see many possible simple limitations one could do to get the thing out the door. _________________ - Don't get fooled by my avatar, I'm not like that (anymore, mostly... maybe only sometimes) > Amiga Classic and OS4 developer for OnyxSoft. |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
gonegahgah
| |
Re: SMP and Forbid together? Posted on 9-Feb-2018 12:27:05
| | [ #16 ] |
|
|
|
Regular Member |
Joined: 5-Dec-2008 Posts: 148
From: Australia | | |
|
| I've only had a quick look at the references provided. I'll try to study them soon. Are there any coding examples that highlight the problems that would have to be overcome?
|
|
Status: Offline |
|
|