Click Here
home features news forums classifieds faqs links search
5656 members 
Amiga Q&A /  Free for All /  Emulation /  Gaming / (Latest Posts)
Login

Nickname

Password

Lost Password?

Don't have an account yet?
Register now!

Support Amigaworld.net
Your support is needed and is appreciated as Amigaworld.net is primarily dependent upon the support of its users.
Donate

Menu
Main sections
Home
Features
News
Forums
Classifieds
Links
Downloads
Extras
OS4 Zone
IRC Network
AmigaWorld Radio
Newsfeed
Top Members
Amiga Dealers
Information
About Us
FAQs
Advertise
Polls
Terms of Service
Search

IRC Channel
Server: irc.amigaworld.net
Channel: #Amigaworld
Channel Policy and Guidelines

(Uses JAVA Applet and Port 1024)
Visit the Chatroom Website

Who's Online
 44 guest(s) on-line.
 1 member(s) on-line.


 K-L

You are an anonymous user.
Register Now!
 K-L:  45 secs ago
 Rob:  6 mins ago
 wawa:  14 mins ago
 Bobapatatas:  36 mins ago
 Fl@sh:  46 mins ago
 lionstorm:  49 mins ago
 MonteCristo:  1 hr 10 mins ago
 MichaelMerkel:  1 hr 24 mins ago
 zipper:  1 hr 28 mins ago
 amigakit:  1 hr 28 mins ago

/  Forum Index
   /  Amiga OS4.x \ Workbench 4.x
      /  SMP and Forbid together?
Register To Post

PosterThread
gonegahgah 
SMP and Forbid together?
Posted on 26-Jan-2018 3:38:35
#1 ]
Member
Joined: 5-Dec-2008
Posts: 91
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
Profile     Report this post  
ilbarbax 
Re: SMP and Forbid together?
Posted on 26-Jan-2018 12:34:19
#2 ]
Regular Member
Joined: 17-Jan-2010
Posts: 146
From: Italy

@gonegahgah

http://blog.hyperion-entertainment.biz/?p=1184

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
BSzili 
Re: SMP and Forbid together?
Posted on 26-Jan-2018 13:02:26
#3 ]
Regular Member
Joined: 16-Nov-2013
Posts: 269
From: Unknown

@gonegahgah

https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1q6lq5peXJBluQTQDSCAL-FR2kAoyxTRXWz3htWX0W1s/htmlpresent

_________________
I see the jimmies have been rustled.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Hypex 
Re: SMP and Forbid together?
Posted on 26-Jan-2018 14:05:32
#4 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 6-May-2007
Posts: 8841
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
Profile     Report this post  
RodTerl 
Re: SMP and Forbid together?
Posted on 26-Jan-2018 15:13:41
#5 ]
Cult Member
Joined: 6-Sep-2004
Posts: 582
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
Profile     Report this post  
tonyw 
Re: SMP and Forbid together?
Posted on 26-Jan-2018 22:09:27
#6 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 8-Mar-2003
Posts: 3113
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
Profile     Report this post  
Hypex 
Re: SMP and Forbid together?
Posted on 27-Jan-2018 15:33:40
#7 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 6-May-2007
Posts: 8841
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
Profile     Report this post  
Tomppeli 
Re: SMP and Forbid together?
Posted on 27-Jan-2018 15:56:26
#8 ]
Super Member
Joined: 18-Jun-2004
Posts: 1610
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, so excuse me. If you'll plan to deal with me, be serious !
X1000 + AmigaOS4.1 FE. Be authentic.
"Anyone can build a fast CPU. The trick is to build a fast system." -Seymour Cray

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
broadblues 
Re: SMP and Forbid together?
Posted on 27-Jan-2018 16:02:48
#9 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 20-Jul-2004
Posts: 4158
From: Portsmouth England

@RodTerl

Quote:

ArexxDeamon


Id that OS4 frendly and do you have link?

A straight forward search for "ArexxDeamon" shows not hits. Nor other spellings of demon inseting a space etc,,,


_________________
BroadBlues On Blues BroadBlues On Amiga Walker Broad

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
number6 
Re: SMP and Forbid together?
Posted on 27-Jan-2018 16:14:23
#10 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 25-Mar-2005
Posts: 9991
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
Profile     Report this post  
broadblues 
Re: SMP and Forbid together?
Posted on 27-Jan-2018 16:35:02
#11 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 20-Jul-2004
Posts: 4158
From: Portsmouth England

@number6

Actually I tried all 'reasonable' combinations daemon,deamon,demon ...

If an ARexx Daemon exists it's not called that and has some fancy name, which is quite possible.

_________________
BroadBlues On Blues BroadBlues On Amiga Walker Broad

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
number6 
Re: SMP and Forbid together?
Posted on 27-Jan-2018 16:40:25
#12 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 25-Mar-2005
Posts: 9991
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
Profile     Report this post  
broadblues 
Re: SMP and Forbid together?
Posted on 27-Jan-2018 16:45:14
#13 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 20-Jul-2004
Posts: 4158
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
Profile     Report this post  
number6 
Re: SMP and Forbid together?
Posted on 27-Jan-2018 16:47:52
#14 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 25-Mar-2005
Posts: 9991
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
Profile     Report this post  
Deniil715 
Re: SMP and Forbid together?
Posted on 28-Jan-2018 13:28:15
#15 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 14-May-2003
Posts: 4148
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
Profile     Report this post  
gonegahgah 
Re: SMP and Forbid together?
Posted on 9-Feb-2018 12:27:05
#16 ]
Member
Joined: 5-Dec-2008
Posts: 91
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
Profile     Report this post  

[ home ][ about us ] [ forums ][ classifieds ] [ links ][ news archive ] [ link to us ][ user account ]
Copyright 2000 - 2017 Amigaworld.net.

Amigaworld.net was originally founded by David Doyle