.. | ||
async.h | ||
concurrent.h | ||
concurrent_for_each.h | ||
condition_variable.h | ||
context.h | ||
continuation.h | ||
critical_assertion.h | ||
critical_indicator.h | ||
ctx.h | ||
dock.h | ||
exception_handler.h | ||
fault.h | ||
future.h | ||
latch.h | ||
list.h | ||
mutex.h | ||
ole.h | ||
pool.h | ||
posix.h | ||
prof.h | ||
promise.h | ||
queue.h | ||
README.md | ||
scope_notify.h | ||
shared_mutex.h | ||
shared_state.h | ||
sleep.h | ||
slice_usage_warning.h | ||
stack.h | ||
stack_usage_assertion.h | ||
this_ctx.h | ||
trit.h | ||
uninterruptible.h | ||
unlock_guard.h | ||
upgrade_lock.h | ||
view.h | ||
wait.h | ||
when.h |
Userspace Context Switching
The ircd::ctx
subsystem is a userspace threading library meant to regress
the asynchronous callback pattern back to synchronous suspensions. These are
stackful coroutines which provide developers with more intuitive control in
environments which conduct frequent I/O which would otherwise break up a single
asynchronous stack into callback-hell.
Motivation
Userspace threads are an alternative to using posix kernel threads as a way to develop intuitively-stackful programs in applications which are primarily I/O-bound rather than CPU-bound. This is born out of a recognition that a single CPU core has enough capacity to compute the entirety of all requests for an efficiently-written network daemon if I/O were instantaneous; if one could use a single thread it is advantageous to do so right up until the compute-bound is reached, rather than introducing more threads for any other reason. The limits to single-threading and scaling beyond a single CPU is then pushed to higher-level application logic: either message-passing between multiple processes (or machines in a cluster), and/or threads which have extremely low interference.
ircd::ctx
allows for a very large number of contexts to exist, on the order
of thousands or more, and still efficiently make progress without the overhead
of kernel context switches. As an anecdotal example, a kernel context switch
from a contended mutex could realistically be five to ten times more costly
than a userspace context switch if not significantly more, and with effects
that are less predictable. Contexts will accomplish as much work as possible
in a "straight line" before yielding to the kernel to wait for the completion
of any I/O event.
There is no preemptive interleaving of contexts. This makes every sequence of instructions executed a natural transaction requiring no other method of exclusion. It also allows for introspective conditions, i.e: check if context switch occurred: if so, refresh value; if not, the old value is good. This is impossible in a preemptive environment as the result may have changed at instruction boundaries rather than at cooperative boundaries.
Foundation
This library is embedded around boost::coroutine / boost::context
.
boost::asio
has then added its own comprehensive integration with the above
libraries eliminating the need for us to worry about a lot of boilerplate to
de-async the asio networking calls. See: boost::asio::spawn.
This is a nice boost, but that's as far as it goes. The rest is on us here to actually make a threading library.
Interface
We mimic the standard library std::thread
suite as much as possible (which
mimics the boost::thread
library) and offer alternative threading primitives
for these userspace contexts rather than those for operating system threads in
std::
such as ctx::mutex
and ctx::condition_variable
and ctx::future
among others.
- The primary user object is
ircd::context
(orircd::ctx::context
) which has anstd::thread
-like interface. By default the lifetime of this instance has significance, and whencontext
goes out of scope, a termination is sent to the child context and the parent yields until it has joined (see DETACH and WAIT_JOIN flags to change this behavior). Take note that this means by default a child context may never be able to complete (or even be entered at all!) if the parent constructs and then desctructscontext
without either any flags or any strategy by the parent to wait for completion.
Context Switching
A context switch has the overhead of a heavy function call -- a function with a bunch of arguments (i.e the registers being saved and restored). We consider this fast and our philosophy is to not think about the context switch itself as a bad thing to be avoided for its own sake.
This system is also fully integrated both with the IRCd core
boost::asio::io_service
event loop and networking systems. There are actually
several types of context switches going on here built on two primitives:
-
Direct jump: This is the fastest switch. Context
A
can yield to contextB
directly ifA
knows aboutB
and if it knows thatB
is in a state ready to resume from a direct jump and thatA
will also be further resumed somehow. This is not always suitable in practice so other techniques may be used instead. -
Queued wakeup: This is the common default and safe switch. This is where the context system integrates with the
boost::asio::io_service
event loop. The execution of a "slice" as we'll call a yield-to-yield run of non-stop computation is analogous to a function posted to theio_service
in the asynchronous pattern. ContextA
can enqueue contextB
if it knows aboutB
and then choose whether to yield or not to yield. In any case theio_service
queue will simply continue to the next task which isn't guaranteed to beB
.
The most common context switching encountered and wielded by developers is the
ctx::dock
, a non-locking condition variable. The power of the dock is in its:
-
Lightweight. It's just a ctx::list; two pointers for a list head, where the nodes are the contexts themselves participating in the list.
-
Cooperative-condition optimized. When a context is waiting on a condition it provides, the ctx system can run the function itself to test the condition without waking up the context.
When does Context Switching (yielding) occur?
Bottom line is that this is simply not javascript. There are no
stack-clairvoyant keywords like await
which explicitly indicate to everyone
everywhere that the overall state of the program before and after any totally
benign-looking function call will be different. This is indeed multi-threaded
programming but in a very PG-13 rated way. You have to assume that if you
aren't sure some function has a "deep yield" somewhere way up the stack that
there is a potential for yielding in that function. Unlike real concurrent
threading everything beyond this is much easier.
-
Anything directly on your stack is safe (same with real MT anyway).
-
static
and global assets are safe if you can assert no yielding. Such an assertion can be made with an instance ofircd::ctx::critical_assertion
. Note that we try to usethread_local
rather thanstatic
to still respect any real multi-threading that may occur now or in the future. -
Calls which may yield and do IO may be marked with
[GET]
and[SET]
conventional labels but they may not be. Some reasoning about obvious yields and a zen-like awareness is always recommended.