Adobe, Acrobat, Acrobat Reader, Flash and PostScript are either registered trademarks or trademarks of Adobe Systems Incorporated in the United States and/or other countries.
IBM, AIX, OS/2, PowerPC, PS/2, S/390, and ThinkPad are trademarks of International Business Machines Corporation in the United States, other countries, or both.
FreeBSD is a registered trademark of the FreeBSD Foundation.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds.
NetBSD is a registered trademark of the NetBSD Foundation.
RealNetworks, RealPlayer, and RealAudio are the registered trademarks of RealNetworks, Inc.
Oracle is a registered trademark of Oracle Corporation.
Sun, Sun Microsystems, Java, Java Virtual Machine, JDK, JRE, JSP, JVM, Netra, OpenJDK, Solaris, StarOffice, SunOS and VirtualBox are trademarks or registered trademarks of Sun Microsystems, Inc. in the United States and other countries.
Many of the designations used by manufacturers and sellers to distinguish their products are claimed as trademarks. Where those designations appear in this document, and the FreeBSD Project was aware of the trademark claim, the designations have been followed by the “™” or the “®” symbol.
This masters thesis deals with updating the Linux® emulation layer (the so called Linuxulator). The task was to update the layer to match the functionality of Linux® 2.6. As a reference implementation, the Linux® 2.6.16 kernel was chosen. The concept is loosely based on the NetBSD implementation. Most of the work was done in the summer of 2006 as a part of the Google Summer of Code students program. The focus was on bringing the NPTL (new POSIX® thread library) support into the emulation layer, including TLS (thread local storage), futexes (fast user space mutexes), PID mangling, and some other minor things. Many small problems were identified and fixed in the process. My work was integrated into the main FreeBSD source repository and will be shipped in the upcoming 7.0R release. We, the emulation development team, are working on making the Linux® 2.6 emulation the default emulation layer in FreeBSD.
In the last few years the open source UNIX® based operating systems started to be widely deployed on server and client machines. Among these operating systems I would like to point out two: FreeBSD, for its BSD heritage, time proven code base and many interesting features and Linux® for its wide user base, enthusiastic open developer community and support from large companies. FreeBSD tends to be used on server class machines serving heavy duty networking tasks with less usage on desktop class machines for ordinary users. While Linux® has the same usage on servers, but it is used much more by home based users. This leads to a situation where there are many binary only programs available for Linux® that lack support for FreeBSD.
Naturally, a need for the ability to run Linux® binaries on a FreeBSD system arises and this is what this thesis deals with: the emulation of the Linux® kernel in the FreeBSD operating system.
During the Summer of 2006 Google Inc. sponsored a project which focused on extending the Linux® emulation layer (the so called Linuxulator) in FreeBSD to include Linux® 2.6 facilities. This thesis is written as a part of this project.
In this section we are going to describe every operating system in question. How they deal with syscalls, trapframes etc., all the low-level stuff. We also describe the way they understand common UNIX® primitives like what a PID is, what a thread is, etc. In the third subsection we talk about how UNIX® on UNIX® emulation could be done in general.
UNIX® is an operating system with a long history that has influenced almost every other operating system currently in use. Starting in the 1960s, its development continues to this day (although in different projects). UNIX® development soon forked into two main ways: the BSDs and System III/V families. They mutually influenced themselves by growing a common UNIX® standard. Among the contributions originated in BSD we can name virtual memory, TCP/IP networking, FFS, and many others. The System V branch contributed to SysV interprocess communication primitives, copy-on-write, etc. UNIX® itself does not exist any more but its ideas have been used by many other operating systems world wide thus forming the so called UNIX®-like operating systems. These days the most influential ones are Linux®, Solaris, and possibly (to some extent) FreeBSD. There are in-company UNIX® derivatives (AIX, HP-UX etc.), but these have been more and more migrated to the aforementioned systems. Let us summarize typical UNIX® characteristics.
Every running program constitutes a process that represents a state of the computation. Running process is divided between kernel-space and user-space. Some operations can be done only from kernel space (dealing with hardware etc.), but the process should spend most of its lifetime in the user space. The kernel is where the management of the processes, hardware, and low-level details take place. The kernel provides a standard unified UNIX® API to the user space. The most important ones are covered below.
Common UNIX® API defines a syscall as a way to issue commands
from a user space process to the kernel. The most common
implementation is either by using an interrupt or specialized
instruction (think of
SYSENTER
/SYSCALL
instructions
for ia32). Syscalls are defined by a number. For example in FreeBSD,
the syscall number 85 is the swapon(2) syscall and the
syscall number 132 is mkfifo(2). Some syscalls need
parameters, which are passed from the user-space to the kernel-space
in various ways (implementation dependant). Syscalls are
synchronous.
Another possible way to communicate is by using a trap. Traps occur asynchronously after some event occurs (division by zero, page fault etc.). A trap can be transparent for a process (page fault) or can result in a reaction like sending a signal (division by zero).
There are other APIs (System V IPC, shared memory etc.) but the single most important API is signal. Signals are sent by processes or by the kernel and received by processes. Some signals can be ignored or handled by a user supplied routine, some result in a predefined action that cannot be altered or ignored.
Kernel instances are processed first in the system (so called init). Every running process can create its identical copy using the fork(2) syscall. Some slightly modified versions of this syscall were introduced but the basic semantic is the same. Every running process can morph into some other process using the exec(3) syscall. Some modifications of this syscall were introduced but all serve the same basic purpose. Processes end their lives by calling the exit(2) syscall. Every process is identified by a unique number called PID. Every process has a defined parent (identified by its PID).
Traditional UNIX® does not define any API nor implementation for threading, while POSIX® defines its threading API but the implementation is undefined. Traditionally there were two ways of implementing threads. Handling them as separate processes (1:1 threading) or envelope the whole thread group in one process and managing the threading in userspace (1:N threading). Comparing main features of each approach:
1:1 threading
- heavyweight threads
- the scheduling cannot be altered by the user (slightly mitigated by the POSIX® API)
+ no syscall wrapping necessary
+ can utilize multiple CPUs
1:N threading
+ lightweight threads
+ scheduling can be easily altered by the user
- syscalls must be wrapped
- cannot utilize more than one CPU
The FreeBSD project is one of the oldest open source operating systems currently available for daily use. It is a direct descendant of the genuine UNIX® so it could be claimed that it is a true UNIX® although licensing issues do not permit that. The start of the project dates back to the early 1990's when a crew of fellow BSD users patched the 386BSD operating system. Based on this patchkit a new operating system arose named FreeBSD for its liberal license. Another group created the NetBSD operating system with different goals in mind. We will focus on FreeBSD.
FreeBSD is a modern UNIX®-based operating system with all the features of UNIX®. Preemptive multitasking, multiuser facilities, TCP/IP networking, memory protection, symmetric multiprocessing support, virtual memory with merged VM and buffer cache, they are all there. One of the interesting and extremely useful features is the ability to emulate other UNIX®-like operating systems. As of December 2006 and 7-CURRENT development, the following emulation functionalities are supported:
FreeBSD/i386 emulation on FreeBSD/amd64
FreeBSD/i386 emulation on FreeBSD/ia64
Linux®-emulation of Linux® operating system on FreeBSD
NDIS-emulation of Windows networking drivers interface
NetBSD-emulation of NetBSD operating system
PECoff-support for PECoff FreeBSD executables
SVR4-emulation of System V revision 4 UNIX®
Actively developed emulations are the Linux® layer and various FreeBSD-on-FreeBSD layers. Others are not supposed to work properly nor be usable these days.
FreeBSD development happens in a central CVS repository where only a selected team of so called committers can write. This repository possesses several branches; the most interesting are the HEAD branch, in FreeBSD nomenclature called -CURRENT, and RELENG_X branches, where X stands for a number indicating a major version of FreeBSD. As of December 2006, there are development branches for 6.X development (RELENG_6) and for the 5.X development (RELENG_5). Other branches are closed and not actively maintained or only fed with security patches by the Security Officer of the FreeBSD project.
Historically the active development was done in the HEAD branch so
it was considered extremely unstable and supposed to happen to break
at any time. This is not true any more as the
Perforce (commercial version control system)
repository was introduced so that active development happen there.
There are many branches in Perforce where
development of certain parts of the system happens and these branches
are from time to time merged back to the main CVS repository thus
effectively putting the given feature to the FreeBSD operating system.
The same happened with the rdivacky_linuxolator
branch where development of this thesis code was going on.
More info about the FreeBSD operating system can be found at [2].
FreeBSD is traditional flavor of UNIX® in the sense of dividing the run of processes into two halves: kernel space and user space run. There are two types of process entry to the kernel: a syscall and a trap. There is only one way to return. In the subsequent sections we will describe the three gates to/from the kernel. The whole description applies to the i386 architecture as the Linuxulator only exists there but the concept is similar on other architectures. The information was taken from [1] and the source code.
FreeBSD has an abstraction called an execution class loader,
which is a wedge into the execve(2) syscall. This employs a
structure sysentvec
, which describes an
executable ABI. It contains things like errno translation table,
signal translation table, various functions to serve syscall needs
(stack fixup, coredumping, etc.). Every ABI the FreeBSD kernel wants
to support must define this structure, as it is used later in the
syscall processing code and at some other places. System entries
are handled by trap handlers, where we can access both the
kernel-space and the user-space at once.
Syscalls on FreeBSD are issued by executing interrupt
0x80
with register %eax
set
to a desired syscall number with arguments passed on the stack.
When a process issues an interrupt 0x80
, the
int0x80
syscall trap handler is issued (defined
in sys/i386/i386/exception.s
), which prepares
arguments (i.e. copies them on to the stack) for a
call to a C function syscall(2) (defined in
sys/i386/i386/trap.c
), which processes the
passed in trapframe. The processing consists of preparing the
syscall (depending on the sysvec
entry),
determining if the syscall is 32-bit or 64-bit one (changes size
of the parameters), then the parameters are copied, including the
syscall. Next, the actual syscall function is executed with
processing of the return code (special cases for
ERESTART
and EJUSTRETURN
errors). Finally an userret()
is scheduled,
switching the process back to the users-pace. The parameters to
the actual syscall handler are passed in the form of
struct thread *td
,
struct syscall args *
arguments where the second
parameter is a pointer to the copied in structure of
parameters.
Handling of traps in FreeBSD is similar to the handling of
syscalls. Whenever a trap occurs, an assembler handler is called.
It is chosen between alltraps, alltraps with regs pushed or
calltrap depending on the type of the trap. This handler prepares
arguments for a call to a C function trap()
(defined in sys/i386/i386/trap.c
), which then
processes the occurred trap. After the processing it might send a
signal to the process and/or exit to userland using
userret()
.
Exits from kernel to userspace happen using the assembler
routine doreti
regardless of whether the kernel
was entered via a trap or via a syscall. This restores the program
status from the stack and returns to the userspace.
FreeBSD operating system adheres to the traditional UNIX® scheme,
where every process has a unique identification number, the so
called PID (Process ID). PID numbers are
allocated either linearly or randomly ranging from
0
to PID_MAX
. The allocation
of PID numbers is done using linear searching of PID space. Every
thread in a process receives the same PID number as result of the
getpid(2) call.
There are currently two ways to implement threading in FreeBSD.
The first way is M:N threading followed by the 1:1 threading model.
The default library used is M:N threading
(libpthread
) and you can switch at runtime to
1:1 threading (libthr
). The plan is to switch
to 1:1 library by default soon. Although those two libraries use
the same kernel primitives, they are accessed through different
API(es). The M:N library uses the kse_*
family
of syscalls while the 1:1 library uses the thr_*
family of syscalls. Because of this, there is no general concept
of thread ID shared between kernel and userspace. Of course, both
threading libraries implement the pthread thread ID API. Every
kernel thread (as described by struct thread
)
has td tid identifier but this is not directly accessible
from userland and solely serves the kernel's needs. It is also
used for 1:1 threading library as pthread's thread ID but handling
of this is internal to the library and cannot be relied on.
As stated previously there are two implementations of threading in FreeBSD. The M:N library divides the work between kernel space and userspace. Thread is an entity that gets scheduled in the kernel but it can represent various number of userspace threads. M userspace threads get mapped to N kernel threads thus saving resources while keeping the ability to exploit multiprocessor parallelism. Further information about the implementation can be obtained from the man page or [1]. The 1:1 library directly maps a userland thread to a kernel thread thus greatly simplifying the scheme. None of these designs implement a fairness mechanism (such a mechanism was implemented but it was removed recently because it caused serious slowdown and made the code more difficult to deal with).
Linux® is a UNIX®-like kernel originally developed by Linus Torvalds, and now being contributed to by a massive crowd of programmers all around the world. From its mere beginnings to todays, with wide support from companies such as IBM or Google, Linux® is being associated with its fast development pace, full hardware support and benevolent dictator model of organization.
Linux® development started in 1991 as a hobbyist project at University of Helsinki in Finland. Since then it has obtained all the features of a modern UNIX®-like OS: multiprocessing, multiuser support, virtual memory, networking, basically everything is there. There are also highly advanced features like virtualization etc.
As of 2006 Linux® seems to be the most widely used open source operating system with support from independent software vendors like Oracle, RealNetworks, Adobe, etc. Most of the commercial software distributed for Linux® can only be obtained in a binary form so recompilation for other operating systems is impossible.
Most of the Linux® development happens in a Git version control system. Git is a distributed system so there is no central source of the Linux® code, but some branches are considered prominent and official. The version number scheme implemented by Linux® consists of four numbers A.B.C.D. Currently development happens in 2.6.C.D, where C represents major version, where new features are added or changed while D is a minor version for bugfixes only.
More information can be obtained from [4].
Linux® follows the traditional UNIX® scheme of dividing the run of a process in two halves: the kernel and user space. The kernel can be entered in two ways: via a trap or via a syscall. The return is handled only in one way. The further description applies to Linux® 2.6 on the i386™ architecture. This information was taken from [3].
Syscalls in Linux® are performed (in userspace) using
syscallX
macros where X substitutes a number
representing the number of parameters of the given syscall. This
macro translates to a code that loads %eax
register with a number of the syscall and executes interrupt
0x80
. After this syscall return is called,
which translates negative return values to positive
errno
values and sets res
to
-1
in case of an error. Whenever the interrupt
0x80
is called the process enters the kernel in
system call trap handler. This routine saves all registers on the
stack and calls the selected syscall entry. Note that the Linux®
calling convention expects parameters to the syscall to be passed
via registers as shown here:
parameter -> %ebx
parameter -> %ecx
parameter -> %edx
parameter -> %esi
parameter -> %edi
parameter -> %ebp
There are some exceptions to this, where Linux® uses different
calling convention (most notably the clone
syscall).
The trap handlers are introduced in
arch/i386/kernel/traps.c
and most of these
handlers live in arch/i386/kernel/entry.S
,
where handling of the traps happens.
Return from the syscall is managed by syscall exit(3), which checks for the process having unfinished work, then checks whether we used user-supplied selectors. If this happens stack fixing is applied and finally the registers are restored from the stack and the process returns to the userspace.
In the 2.6 version, the Linux® operating system redefined some
of the traditional UNIX® primitives, notably PID, TID and thread.
PID is defined not to be unique for every process, so for some
processes (threads) getppid(2) returns the same value. Unique
identification of process is provided by TID. This is because
NPTL (New POSIX® Thread Library) defines
threads to be normal processes (so called 1:1 threading). Spawning
a new process in Linux® 2.6 happens using the
clone
syscall (fork variants are reimplemented using
it). This clone syscall defines a set of flags that affect
behaviour of the cloning process regarding thread implementation.
The semantic is a bit fuzzy as there is no single flag telling the
syscall to create a thread.
Implemented clone flags are:
CLONE_VM
- processes share their memory
space
CLONE_FS
- share umask, cwd and
namespace
CLONE_FILES
- share open
files
CLONE_SIGHAND
- share signal handlers
and blocked signals
CLONE_PARENT
- share parent
CLONE_THREAD
- be thread (further
explanation below)
CLONE_NEWNS
- new namespace
CLONE_SYSVSEM
- share SysV undo
structures
CLONE_SETTLS
- setup TLS at supplied
address
CLONE_PARENT_SETTID
- set TID in the
parent
CLONE_CHILD_CLEARTID
- clear TID in the
child
CLONE_CHILD_SETTID
- set TID in the
child
CLONE_PARENT
sets the real parent to the
parent of the caller. This is useful for threads because if thread
A creates thread B we want thread B to be parented to the parent of
the whole thread group. CLONE_THREAD
does
exactly the same thing as CLONE_PARENT
,
CLONE_VM
and CLONE_SIGHAND
,
rewrites PID to be the same as PID of the caller, sets exit signal
to be none and enters the thread group.
CLONE_SETTLS
sets up GDT entries for TLS
handling. The CLONE_*_*TID
set of flags
sets/clears user supplied address to TID or 0.
As you can see the CLONE_THREAD
does most
of the work and does not seem to fit the scheme very well. The
original intention is unclear (even for authors, according to
comments in the code) but I think originally there was one
threading flag, which was then parcelled among many other flags
but this separation was never fully finished. It is also unclear
what this partition is good for as glibc does not use that so only
hand-written use of the clone permits a programmer to access this
features.
For non-threaded programs the PID and TID are the same. For
threaded programs the first thread PID and TID are the same and
every created thread shares the same PID and gets assigned a
unique TID (because CLONE_THREAD
is passed in)
also parent is shared for all processes forming this threaded
program.
The code that implements pthread_create(3) in NPTL defines the clone flags like this:
int clone_flags = (CLONE_VM | CLONE_FS | CLONE_FILES | CLONE_SIGNAL | CLONE_SETTLS | CLONE_PARENT_SETTID | CLONE_CHILD_CLEARTID | CLONE_SYSVSEM #if __ASSUME_NO_CLONE_DETACHED == 0 | CLONE_DETACHED #endif | 0);
The CLONE_SIGNAL
is defined like
#define CLONE_SIGNAL (CLONE_SIGHAND | CLONE_THREAD)
the last 0 means no signal is sent when any of the threads exits.
According to a dictionary definition, emulation is the ability of a program or device to imitate another program or device. This is achieved by providing the same reaction to a given stimulus as the emulated object. In practice, the software world mostly sees three types of emulation - a program used to emulate a machine (QEMU, various game console emulators etc.), software emulation of a hardware facility (OpenGL emulators, floating point units emulation etc.) and operating system emulation (either in kernel of the operating system or as a userspace program).
Emulation is usually used in a place, where using the original component is not feasible nor possible at all. For example someone might want to use a program developed for a different operating system than they use. Then emulation comes in handy. Sometimes there is no other way but to use emulation - e.g. when the hardware device you try to use does not exist (yet/anymore) then there is no other way but emulation. This happens often when porting an operating system to a new (non-existent) platform. Sometimes it is just cheaper to emulate.
Looking from an implementation point of view, there are two main approaches to the implementation of emulation. You can either emulate the whole thing - accepting possible inputs of the original object, maintaining inner state and emitting correct output based on the state and/or input. This kind of emulation does not require any special conditions and basically can be implemented anywhere for any device/program. The drawback is that implementing such emulation is quite difficult, time-consuming and error-prone. In some cases we can use a simpler approach. Imagine you want to emulate a printer that prints from left to right on a printer that prints from right to left. It is obvious that there is no need for a complex emulation layer but simply reversing of the printed text is sufficient. Sometimes the emulating environment is very similar to the emulated one so just a thin layer of some translation is necessary to provide fully working emulation! As you can see this is much less demanding to implement, so less time-consuming and error-prone than the previous approach. But the necessary condition is that the two environments must be similar enough. The third approach combines the two previous. Most of the time the objects do not provide the same capabilities so in a case of emulating the more powerful one on the less powerful we have to emulate the missing features with full emulation described above.
This master thesis deals with emulation of UNIX® on UNIX®, which is exactly the case, where only a thin layer of translation is sufficient to provide full emulation. The UNIX® API consists of a set of syscalls, which are usually self contained and do not affect some global kernel state.
There are a few syscalls that affect inner state but this can be dealt with by providing some structures that maintain the extra state.
No emulation is perfect and emulations tend to lack some parts but this usually does not cause any serious drawbacks. Imagine a game console emulator that emulates everything but music output. No doubt that the games are playable and one can use the emulator. It might not be that comfortable as the original game console but its an acceptable compromise between price and comfort.
The same goes with the UNIX® API. Most programs can live with a very limited set of syscalls working. Those syscalls tend to be the oldest ones (read(2)/write(2), fork(2) family, signal(3) handling, exit(3), socket(2) API) hence it is easy to emulate because their semantics is shared among all UNIX®es, which exist todays.
As stated earlier, FreeBSD supports running binaries from several other UNIX®es. This works because FreeBSD has an abstraction called the execution class loader. This wedges into the execve(2) syscall, so when execve(2) is about to execute a binary it examines its type.
There are basically two types of binaries in FreeBSD. Shell-like text
scripts which are identified by #!
as their first
two characters and normal (typically ELF)
binaries, which are a representation of a compiled executable object.
The vast majority (one could say all of them) of binaries in FreeBSD are
from type ELF. ELF files contain a header, which specifies the OS ABI
for this ELF file. By reading this information, the operating system
can accurately determine what type of binary the given file is.
Every OS ABI must be registered in the FreeBSD kernel. This applies
to the FreeBSD native OS ABI, as well. So when execve(2) executes a
binary it iterates through the list of registered APIs and when it
finds the right one it starts to use the information contained in the
OS ABI description (its syscall table, errno
translation table, etc.). So every time the process calls a syscall,
it uses its own set of syscalls instead of some global one. This
effectively provides a very elegant and easy way of supporting
execution of various binary formats.
The nature of emulation of different OSes (and also some other subsystems) led developers to invite a handler event mechanism. There are various places in the kernel, where a list of event handlers are called. Every subsystem can register an event handler and they are called accordingly. For example, when a process exits there is a handler called that possibly cleans up whatever the subsystem needs to be cleaned.
Those simple facilities provide basically everything that is needed for the emulation infrastructure and in fact these are basically the only things necessary to implement the Linux® emulation layer.
Emulation layers need some support from the operating system. I am going to describe some of the supported primitives in the FreeBSD operating system.
Contributed by: Attilio Rao <[email protected]>
The FreeBSD synchronization primitive set is based on the idea to supply a rather huge number of different primitives in a way that the better one can be used for every particular, appropriate situation.
To a high level point of view you can consider three kinds of synchronization primitives in the FreeBSD kernel:
atomic operations and memory barriers
locks
scheduling barriers
Below there are descriptions for the 3 families. For every lock, you should really check the linked manpage (where possible) for more detailed explanations.
Atomic operations are implemented through a set of functions
performing simple arithmetics on memory operands in an atomic way
with respect to external events (interrupts, preemption, etc.).
Atomic operations can guarantee atomicity just on small data types
(in the magnitude order of the .long.
architecture C data type), so should be rarely used directly in the
end-level code, if not only for very simple operations (like flag
setting in a bitmap, for example). In fact, it is rather simple
and common to write down a wrong semantic based on just atomic
operations (usually referred as lock-less). The FreeBSD kernel offers
a way to perform atomic operations in conjunction with a memory
barrier. The memory barriers will guarantee that an atomic
operation will happen following some specified ordering with
respect to other memory accesses. For example, if we need that an
atomic operation happen just after all other pending writes (in
terms of instructions reordering buffers activities) are completed,
we need to explicitly use a memory barrier in conjunction to this
atomic operation. So it is simple to understand why memory
barriers play a key role for higher-level locks building (just
as refcounts, mutexes, etc.). For a detailed explanatory on atomic
operations, please refer to atomic(9). It is far, however,
noting that atomic operations (and memory barriers as well) should
ideally only be used for building front-ending locks (as
mutexes).
Refcounts are interfaces for handling reference counters.
They are implemented through atomic operations and are intended to
be used just for cases, where the reference counter is the only
one thing to be protected, so even something like a spin-mutex is
deprecated. Using the refcount interface for structures, where
a mutex is already used is often wrong since we should probably
close the reference counter in some already protected paths. A
manpage discussing refcount does not exist currently, just check
sys/refcount.h
for an overview of the
existing API.
FreeBSD kernel has huge classes of locks. Every lock is defined by some peculiar properties, but probably the most important is the event linked to contesting holders (or in other terms, the behaviour of threads unable to acquire the lock). FreeBSD's locking scheme presents three different behaviours for contenders:
spinning
blocking
sleeping
numbers are not casual
Spin locks let waiters to spin until they cannot acquire the lock. An important matter do deal with is when a thread contests on a spin lock if it is not descheduled. Since the FreeBSD kernel is preemptive, this exposes spin lock at the risk of deadlocks that can be solved just disabling interrupts while they are acquired. For this and other reasons (like lack of priority propagation support, poorness in load balancing schemes between CPUs, etc.), spin locks are intended to protect very small paths of code, or ideally not to be used at all if not explicitly requested (explained later).
Block locks let waiters to be descheduled and blocked until the lock owner does not drop it and wakes up one or more contenders. In order to avoid starvation issues, blocking locks do priority propagation from the waiters to the owner. Block locks must be implemented through the turnstile interface and are intended to be the most used kind of locks in the kernel, if no particular conditions are met.
Sleep locks let waiters to be descheduled and fall asleep until the lock holder does not drop it and wakes up one or more waiters. Since sleep locks are intended to protect large paths of code and to cater asynchronous events, they do not do any form of priority propagation. They must be implemented through the sleepqueue(9) interface.
The order used to acquire locks is very important, not only for the possibility to deadlock due at lock order reversals, but even because lock acquisition should follow specific rules linked to locks natures. If you give a look at the table above, the practical rule is that if a thread holds a lock of level n (where the level is the number listed close to the kind of lock) it is not allowed to acquire a lock of superior levels, since this would break the specified semantic for a path. For example, if a thread holds a block lock (level 2), it is allowed to acquire a spin lock (level 1) but not a sleep lock (level 3), since block locks are intended to protect smaller paths than sleep lock (these rules are not about atomic operations or scheduling barriers, however).
This is a list of lock with their respective behaviours:
spin mutex - spinning - mutex(9)
sleep mutex - blocking - mutex(9)
pool mutex - blocking - mtx_pool(9)
sleep family - sleeping - sleep(9) pause tsleep msleep msleep spin msleep rw msleep sx
condvar - sleeping - condvar(9)
rwlock - blocking - rwlock(9)
sxlock - sleeping - sx(9)
lockmgr - sleeping - lockmgr(9)
semaphores - sleeping - sema(9)
Among these locks only mutexes, sxlocks, rwlocks and lockmgrs are intended to handle recursion, but currently recursion is only supported by mutexes and lockmgrs.
Scheduling barriers are intended to be used in order to drive scheduling of threading. They consist mainly of three different stubs:
critical sections (and preemption)
sched_bind
sched_pin
Generally, these should be used only in a particular context and even if they can often replace locks, they should be avoided because they do not let the diagnose of simple eventual problems with locking debugging tools (as witness(4)).
The FreeBSD kernel has been made preemptive basically to deal with interrupt threads. In fact, in order to avoid high interrupt latency, time-sharing priority threads can be preempted by interrupt threads (in this way, they do not need to wait to be scheduled as the normal path previews). Preemption, however, introduces new racing points that need to be handled, as well. Often, in order to deal with preemption, the simplest thing to do is to completely disable it. A critical section defines a piece of code (borderlined by the pair of functions critical_enter(9) and critical_exit(9), where preemption is guaranteed to not happen (until the protected code is fully executed). This can often replace a lock effectively but should be used carefully in order to not lose the whole advantage that preemption brings.
Another way to deal with preemption is the
sched_pin()
interface. If a piece of code
is closed in the sched_pin()
and
sched_unpin()
pair of functions it is
guaranteed that the respective thread, even if it can be preempted,
it will always be executed on the same CPU. Pinning is very
effective in the particular case when we have to access at
per-cpu datas and we assume other threads will not change those
data. The latter condition will determine a critical section
as a too strong condition for our code.
sched_bind
is an API used in order to bind
a thread to a particular CPU for all the time it executes the code,
until a sched_unbind
function call does not
unbind it. This feature has a key role in situations where you
cannot trust the current state of CPUs (for example, at very early
stages of boot), as you want to avoid your thread to migrate on
inactive CPUs. Since sched_bind
and
sched_unbind
manipulate internal scheduler
structures, they need to be enclosed in
sched_lock
acquisition/releasing when
used.
Various emulation layers sometimes require some additional
per-process data. It can manage separate structures (a list, a tree
etc.) containing these data for every process but this tends to be
slow and memory consuming. To solve this problem the FreeBSD
proc
structure contains
p_emuldata
, which is a void pointer to some
emulation layer specific data. This proc
entry
is protected by the proc mutex.
The FreeBSD proc
structure contains a
p_sysent
entry that identifies, which ABI this
process is running. In fact, it is a pointer to the
sysentvec
described above. So by comparing this
pointer to the address where the sysentvec
structure for the given ABI is stored we can effectively determine
whether the process belongs to our emulation layer. The code
typically looks like:
if (__predict_true(p->p_sysent != &elf_Linux®_sysvec))
return;
As you can see, we effectively use the
__predict_true
modifier to collapse the most
common case (FreeBSD process) to a simple return operation thus
preserving high performance. This code should be turned into a
macro because currently it is not very flexible, i.e. we do not
support Linux®64 emulation nor A.OUT Linux® processes
on i386.
The FreeBSD VFS subsystem is very complex but the Linux® emulation layer uses just a small subset via a well defined API. It can either operate on vnodes or file handlers. Vnode represents a virtual vnode, i.e. representation of a node in VFS. Another representation is a file handler, which represents an opened file from the perspective of a process. A file handler can represent a socket or an ordinary file. A file handler contains a pointer to its vnode. More then one file handler can point to the same vnode.
The namei(9) routine is a central entry point to pathname lookup and translation. It traverses the path point by point from the starting point to the end point using lookup function, which is internal to VFS. The namei(9) syscall can cope with symlinks, absolute and relative paths. When a path is looked up using namei(9) it is inputed to the name cache. This behaviour can be suppressed. This routine is used all over the kernel and its performance is very critical.
The vn_fullpath(9) function takes the best effort to traverse VFS name cache and returns a path for a given (locked) vnode. This process is unreliable but works just fine for the most common cases. The unreliability is because it relies on VFS cache (it does not traverse the on medium structures), it does not work with hardlinks, etc. This routine is used in several places in the Linuxulator.
fgetvp
- given a thread and a file
descriptor number it returns the associated vnode
vn_lock(9) - locks a vnode
vn_unlock
- unlocks a vnode
VOP_READDIR(9) - reads a directory referenced by a vnode
VOP_GETATTR(9) - gets attributes of a file or a directory referenced by a vnode
VOP_LOOKUP(9) - looks up a path to a given directory
VOP_OPEN(9) - opens a file referenced by a vnode
VOP_CLOSE(9) - closes a file referenced by a vnode
vput(9) - decrements the use count for a vnode and unlocks it
vrele(9) - decrements the use count for a vnode
vref(9) - increments the use count for a vnode
This section deals with implementation of Linux® emulation layer in FreeBSD operating system. It first describes the machine dependent part talking about how and where interaction between userland and kernel is implemented. It talks about syscalls, signals, ptrace, traps, stack fixup. This part discusses i386 but it is written generally so other architectures should not differ very much. The next part is the machine independent part of the Linuxulator. This section only covers i386 and ELF handling. A.OUT is obsolete and untested.
Syscall handling is mostly written in
linux_sysvec.c
, which covers most of the routines
pointed out in the sysentvec
structure. When a
Linux® process running on FreeBSD issues a syscall, the general syscall
routine calls linux prepsyscall routine for the Linux® ABI.
Linux® passes arguments to syscalls via registers (that is why
it is limited to 6 parameters on i386) while FreeBSD uses the stack.
The Linux® prepsyscall routine must copy parameters from registers
to the stack. The order of the registers is:
%ebx
, %ecx
,
%edx
, %esi
,
%edi
, %ebp
. The catch is that
this is true for only most of the syscalls.
Some (most notably clone
) uses a different
order but it is luckily easy to fix by inserting a dummy parameter
in the linux_clone
prototype.
Every syscall implemented in the Linuxulator must have its
prototype with various flags in syscalls.master
.
The form of the file is:
... AUE_FORK STD { int linux_fork(void); } ... AUE_CLOSE NOPROTO { int close(int fd); } ...
The first column represents the syscall number. The second
column is for auditing support. The third column represents the
syscall type. It is either STD
,
OBSOL
, NOPROTO
and
UNIMPL
. STD
is a standard
syscall with full prototype and implementation.
OBSOL
is obsolete and defines just the prototype.
NOPROTO
means that the syscall is implemented
elsewhere so do not prepend ABI prefix, etc.
UNIMPL
means that the syscall will be
substituted with the nosys
syscall
(a syscall just printing out a message about the syscall not being
implemented and returning ENOSYS
).
From syscalls.master
a script generates
three files: linux_syscall.h
,
linux_proto.h
and
linux_sysent.c
. The
linux_syscall.h
contains definitions of syscall
names and their numerical value, e.g.:
... #define LINUX_SYS_linux_fork 2 ... #define LINUX_SYS_close 6 ...
The linux_proto.h
contains structure
definitions of arguments to every syscall, e.g.:
struct linux_fork_args { register_t dummy; };
And finally, linux_sysent.c
contains
structure describing the system entry table, used to actually
dispatch a syscall, e.g.:
{ 0, (sy_call_t *)linux_fork, AUE_FORK, NULL, 0, 0 }, /* 2 = linux_fork */ { AS(close_args), (sy_call_t *)close, AUE_CLOSE, NULL, 0, 0 }, /* 6 = close */
As you can see linux_fork
is implemented
in Linuxulator itself so the definition is of STD
type and has no argument, which is exhibited by the dummy argument
structure. On the other hand close
is just an
alias for real FreeBSD close(2) so it has no linux arguments
structure associated and in the system entry table it is not prefixed
with linux as it calls the real close(2) in the kernel.
The Linux® emulation layer is not complete, as some syscalls are
not implemented properly and some are not implemented at all. The
emulation layer employs a facility to mark unimplemented syscalls
with the DUMMY
macro. These dummy definitions
reside in linux_dummy.c
in a form of
DUMMY(syscall);
, which is then translated to
various syscall auxiliary files and the implementation consists
of printing a message saying that this syscall is not implemented.
The UNIMPL
prototype is not used because we want
to be able to identify the name of the syscall that was called in
order to know what syscalls are more important to implement.
Signal handling is done generally in the FreeBSD kernel for all
binary compatibilities with a call to a compat-dependent layer.
Linux® compatibility layer defines
linux_sendsig
routine for this purpose.
This routine first checks whether the signal has been installed
with a SA_SIGINFO
in which case it calls
linux_rt_sendsig
routine instead. Furthermore,
it allocates (or reuses an already existing) signal handle context,
then it builds a list of arguments for the signal handler. It
translates the signal number based on the signal translation table,
assigns a handler, translates sigset. Then it saves context for the
sigreturn
routine (various registers, translated
trap number and signal mask). Finally, it copies out the signal
context to the userspace and prepares context for the actual
signal handler to run.
This routine is similar to linux_sendsig
just the signal context preparation is different. It adds
siginfo
, ucontext
, and some
POSIX® parts. It might be worth considering whether those two
functions could not be merged with a benefit of less code duplication
and possibly even faster execution.
Many UNIX® derivates implement the ptrace(2) syscall in order to allow various tracking and debugging features. This facility enables the tracing process to obtain various information about the traced process, like register dumps, any memory from the process address space, etc. and also to trace the process like in stepping an instruction or between system entries (syscalls and traps). ptrace(2) also lets you set various information in the traced process (registers etc.). ptrace(2) is a UNIX®-wide standard implemented in most UNIX®es around the world.
Linux® emulation in FreeBSD implements the ptrace(2) facility
in linux_ptrace.c
. The routines for converting
registers between Linux® and FreeBSD and the actual ptrace(2)
syscall emulation syscall. The syscall is a long switch block that
implements its counterpart in FreeBSD for every ptrace(2) command.
The ptrace(2) commands are mostly equal between Linux® and FreeBSD
so usually just a small modification is needed. For example,
PT_GETREGS
in Linux® operates on direct data while
FreeBSD uses a pointer to the data so after performing a (native)
ptrace(2) syscall, a copyout must be done to preserve Linux®
semantics.
The ptrace(2) implementation in Linuxulator has some known
weaknesses. There have been panics seen when using
strace
(which is a ptrace(2) consumer) in the
Linuxulator environment. Also PT_SYSCALL
is not
implemented.
Whenever a Linux® process running in the emulation layer traps the trap itself is handled transparently with the only exception of the trap translation. Linux® and FreeBSD differs in opinion on what a trap is so this is dealt with here. The code is actually very short:
static int translate_traps(int signal, int trap_code) { if (signal != SIGBUS) return signal; switch (trap_code) { case T_PROTFLT: case T_TSSFLT: case T_DOUBLEFLT: case T_PAGEFLT: return SIGSEGV; default: return signal; } }
The RTLD run-time link-editor expects so called AUX tags on stack
during an execve
so a fixup must be done to ensure
this. Of course, every RTLD system is different so the emulation layer
must provide its own stack fixup routine to do this. So does
Linuxulator. The elf_linux_fixup
simply copies
out AUX tags to the stack and adjusts the stack of the user space
process to point right after those tags. So RTLD works in a
smart way.
The Linux® emulation layer on i386 also supports Linux® A.OUT
binaries. Pretty much everything described in the previous sections
must be implemented for A.OUT support (beside traps translation and
signals sending). The support for A.OUT binaries is no longer
maintained, especially the 2.6 emulation does not work with it but
this does not cause any problem, as the linux-base in ports probably
do not support A.OUT binaries at all. This support will probably be
removed in future. Most of the stuff necessary for loading Linux®
A.OUT binaries is in imgact_linux.c
file.
This section talks about machine independent part of the Linuxulator. It covers the emulation infrastructure needed for Linux® 2.6 emulation, the thread local storage (TLS) implementation (on i386) and futexes. Then we talk briefly about some syscalls.
One of the major areas of progress in development of Linux® 2.6
was threading. Prior to 2.6, the Linux® threading support was
implemented in the linuxthreads library.
The library was a partial implementation of POSIX® threading. The
threading was implemented using separate processes for each thread
using the clone
syscall to let them share the
address space (and other things). The main weaknesses of this
approach was that every thread had a different PID, signal handling
was broken (from the pthreads perspective), etc. Also the performance
was not very good (use of SIGUSR
signals for
threads synchronization, kernel resource consumption, etc.) so to
overcome these problems a new threading system was developed and
named NPTL.
The NPTL library focused on two things but a third thing came along so it is usually considered a part of NPTL. Those two things were embedding of threads into a process structure and futexes. The additional third thing was TLS, which is not directly required by NPTL but the whole NPTL userland library depends on it. Those improvements yielded in much improved performance and standards conformance. NPTL is a standard threading library in Linux® systems these days.
The FreeBSD Linuxulator implementation approaches the NPTL in three main areas. The TLS, futexes and PID mangling, which is meant to simulate the Linux® threads. Further sections describe each of these areas.
These sections deal with the way Linux® threads are managed and how we simulate that in FreeBSD.
The Linux® emulation layer in FreeBSD supports runtime setting of
the emulated version. This is done via sysctl(8), namely
compat.linux.osrelease
, which is set to 2.4.2 by
default (as of April 2007) and with all Linux® versions up to 2.6
it just determined what uname(1) outputs. It is different with
2.6 emulation where setting this sysctl(8) affects runtime
behaviour of the emulation layer. When set to 2.6.x it sets the
value of linux_use_linux26
while setting to
something else keeps it unset. This variable (plus per-prison
variables of the very same kind) determines whether 2.6
infrastructure (mainly PID mangling) is used in the code or not.
The version setting is done system-wide and this affects all Linux®
processes. The sysctl(8) should not be changed when running any
Linux® binary as it might harm things.
The semantics of Linux® threading are a little confusing and
uses entirely different nomenclature to FreeBSD. A process in
Linux® consists of a struct task
embedding two
identifier fields - PID and TGID. PID is not
a process ID but it is a thread ID. The TGID identifies a thread
group in other words a process. For single-threaded process the
PID equals the TGID.
The thread in NPTL is just an ordinary process that happens to have TGID not equal to PID and have a group leader not equal to itself (and shared VM etc. of course). Everything else happens in the same way as to an ordinary process. There is no separation of a shared status to some external structure like in FreeBSD. This creates some duplication of information and possible data inconsistency. The Linux® kernel seems to use task -> group information in some places and task information elsewhere and it is really not very consistent and looks error-prone.
Every NPTL thread is created by a call to the
clone
syscall with a specific set of flags
(more in the next subsection). The NPTL implements strict
1:1 threading.
In FreeBSD we emulate NPTL threads with ordinary FreeBSD processes that share VM space, etc. and the PID gymnastic is just mimicked in the emulation specific structure attached to the process. The structure attached to the process looks like:
struct linux_emuldata { pid_t pid; int *child_set_tid; /* in clone(): Child.s TID to set on clone */ int *child_clear_tid;/* in clone(): Child.s TID to clear on exit */ struct linux_emuldata_shared *shared; int pdeath_signal; /* parent death signal */ LIST_ENTRY(linux_emuldata) threads; /* list of linux threads */ };
The PID is used to identify the FreeBSD process that attaches this
structure. The child_se_tid
and
child_clear_tid
are used for TID address
copyout when a process exits and is created. The
shared
pointer points to a structure shared
among threads. The pdeath_signal
variable
identifies the parent death signal and the
threads
pointer is used to link this structure
to the list of threads. The linux_emuldata_shared
structure looks like:
struct linux_emuldata_shared { int refs; pid_t group_pid; LIST_HEAD(, linux_emuldata) threads; /* head of list of linux threads */ };
The refs
is a reference counter being used
to determine when we can free the structure to avoid memory leaks.
The group_pid
is to identify PID ( = TGID) of the
whole process ( = thread group). The threads
pointer is the head of the list of threads in the process.
The linux_emuldata
structure can be obtained
from the process using em_find
. The prototype
of the function is:
struct linux_emuldata *em_find(struct proc *, int locked);
Here, proc
is the process we want the emuldata
structure from and the locked parameter determines whether we want to
lock or not. The accepted values are EMUL_DOLOCK
and EMUL_DOUNLOCK
. More about locking
later.
Because of the described different view knowing what a process
ID and thread ID is between FreeBSD and Linux® we have to translate
the view somehow. We do it by PID mangling. This means that we
fake what a PID (=TGID) and TID (=PID) is between kernel and
userland. The rule of thumb is that in kernel (in Linuxulator)
PID = PID and TGID = shared -> group pid and to userland we
present PID = shared -> group_pid
and
TID = proc -> p_pid
.
The PID member of linux_emuldata structure
is
a FreeBSD PID.
The above affects mainly getpid, getppid, gettid syscalls. Where
we use PID/TGID respectively. In copyout of TIDs in
child_clear_tid
and
child_set_tid
we copy out FreeBSD PID.
The clone
syscall is the way threads are
created in Linux®. The syscall prototype looks like this:
int linux_clone(l_int flags, void *stack, void *parent_tidptr, int dummy, void * child_tidptr);
The flags
parameter tells the syscall how
exactly the processes should be cloned. As described above, Linux®
can create processes sharing various things independently, for
example two processes can share file descriptors but not VM, etc.
Last byte of the flags
parameter is the exit
signal of the newly created process. The stack
parameter if non-NULL
tells, where the thread
stack is and if it is NULL
we are supposed to
copy-on-write the calling process stack (i.e. do what normal
fork(2) routine does). The parent_tidptr
parameter is used as an address for copying out process PID (i.e.
thread id) once the process is sufficiently instantiated but is
not runnable yet. The dummy
parameter is here
because of the very strange calling convention of this syscall on
i386. It uses the registers directly and does not let the compiler
do it what results in the need of a dummy syscall. The
child_tidptr
parameter is used as an address
for copying out PID once the process has finished forking and when
the process exits.
The syscall itself proceeds by setting corresponding flags
depending on the flags passed in. For example,
CLONE_VM
maps to RFMEM (sharing of VM), etc.
The only nit here is CLONE_FS
and
CLONE_FILES
because FreeBSD does not allow setting
this separately so we fake it by not setting RFFDG (copying of fd
table and other fs information) if either of these is defined. This
does not cause any problems, because those flags are always set
together. After setting the flags the process is forked using
the internal fork1
routine, the process is
instrumented not to be put on a run queue, i.e. not to be set
runnable. After the forking is done we possibly reparent the newly
created process to emulate CLONE_PARENT
semantics.
Next part is creating the emulation data. Threads in Linux® does
not signal their parents so we set exit signal to be 0 to disable
this. After that setting of child_set_tid
and
child_clear_tid
is performed enabling the
functionality later in the code. At this point we copy out the PID
to the address specified by parent_tidptr
. The
setting of process stack is done by simply rewriting thread frame
%esp
register (%rsp
on amd64).
Next part is setting up TLS for the newly created process. After
this vfork(2) semantics might be emulated and finally the newly
created process is put on a run queue and copying out its PID to the
parent process via clone
return value is
done.
The clone
syscall is able and in fact is
used for emulating classic fork(2) and vfork(2) syscalls.
Newer glibc in a case of 2.6 kernel uses clone
to implement fork(2) and vfork(2) syscalls.
The locking is implemented to be per-subsystem because we do not
expect a lot of contention on these. There are two locks:
emul_lock
used to protect manipulating of
linux_emuldata
and
emul_shared_lock
used to manipulate
linux_emuldata_shared
. The
emul_lock
is a nonsleepable blocking mutex while
emul_shared_lock
is a sleepable blocking
sx_lock
. Because of the per-subsystem locking we
can coalesce some locks and that is why the em find offers the
non-locking access.
This section deals with TLS also known as thread local storage.
Threads in computer science are entities within a process that
can be scheduled independently from each other. The threads in the
process share process wide data (file descriptors, etc.) but also
have their own stack for their own data. Sometimes there is a need
for process-wide data specific to a given thread. Imagine a name of
the thread in execution or something like that. The traditional
UNIX® threading API, pthreads provides
a way to do it via pthread_key_create(3),
pthread_setspecific(3) and pthread_getspecific(3) where a
thread can create a key to the thread local data and using
pthread_getspecific(3) or pthread_getspecific(3) to
manipulate those data. You can easily see that this is not the most
comfortable way this could be accomplished. So various producers of
C/C++ compilers introduced a better way. They defined a new modifier
keyword thread that specifies that a variable is thread specific. A
new method of accessing such variables was developed as well (at
least on i386). The pthreads method tends
to be implemented in userspace as a trivial lookup table. The
performance of such a solution is not very good. So the new method
uses (on i386) segment registers to address a segment, where TLS area
is stored so the actual accessing of a thread variable is just
appending the segment register to the address thus addressing via it.
The segment registers are usually %gs
and
%fs
acting like segment selectors. Every thread
has its own area where the thread local data are stored and the
segment must be loaded on every context switch. This method is very
fast and used almost exclusively in the whole i386 UNIX® world.
Both FreeBSD and Linux® implement this approach and it yields very good
results. The only drawback is the need to reload the segment on
every context switch which can slowdown context switches. FreeBSD tries
to avoid this overhead by using only 1 segment descriptor for this
while Linux® uses 3. Interesting thing is that almost nothing uses
more than 1 descriptor (only Wine seems to
use 2) so Linux® pays this unnecessary price for context
switches.
The i386 architecture implements the so called segments. A
segment is a description of an area of memory. The base address
(bottom) of the memory area, the end of it (ceiling), type,
protection, etc. The memory described by a segment can be accessed
using segment selector registers (%cs
,
%ds
, %ss
,
%es
, %fs
,
%gs
). For example let us suppose we have a
segment which base address is 0x1234 and length and this code:
mov %edx,%gs:0x10
This will load the content of the %edx
register into memory location 0x1244. Some segment registers have
a special use, for example %cs
is used for code
segment and %ss
is used for stack segment but
%fs
and %gs
are generally
unused. Segments are either stored in a global GDT table or in a
local LDT table. LDT is accessed via an entry in the GDT. The
LDT can store more types of segments. LDT can be per process.
Both tables define up to 8191 entries.
There are two main ways of setting up TLS in Linux®. It can be
set when cloning a process using the clone
syscall or it can call set_thread_area
. When a
process passes CLONE_SETTLS
flag to
clone
, the kernel expects the memory pointed to
by the %esi
register a Linux® user space
representation of a segment, which gets translated to the machine
representation of a segment and loaded into a GDT slot. The
GDT slot can be specified with a number or -1 can be used meaning
that the system itself should choose the first free slot. In
practice, the vast majority of programs use only one TLS entry and
does not care about the number of the entry. We exploit this in the
emulation and in fact depend on it.
Loading of TLS for the current thread happens by calling
set_thread_area
while loading TLS for a
second process in clone
is done in the
separate block in clone
. Those two functions
are very similar. The only difference being the actual loading of
the GDT segment, which happens on the next context switch for the
newly created process while set_thread_area
must load this directly. The code basically does this. It copies
the Linux® form segment descriptor from the userland. The code
checks for the number of the descriptor but because this differs
between FreeBSD and Linux® we fake it a little. We only support
indexes of 6, 3 and -1. The 6 is genuine Linux® number, 3 is
genuine FreeBSD one and -1 means autoselection. Then we set the
descriptor number to constant 3 and copy out this to the
userspace. We rely on the userspace process using the number from
the descriptor but this works most of the time (have never seen a
case where this did not work) as the userspace process typically
passes in 1. Then we convert the descriptor from the Linux® form
to a machine dependant form (i.e. operating system independent
form) and copy this to the FreeBSD defined segment descriptor.
Finally we can load it. We assign the descriptor to threads PCB
(process control block) and load the %gs
segment using load_gs
. This loading must be
done in a critical section so that nothing can interrupt us.
The CLONE_SETTLS
case works exactly like this
just the loading using load_gs
is not
performed. The segment used for this (segment number 3) is
shared for this use between FreeBSD processes and Linux® processes
so the Linux® emulation layer does not add any overhead over
plain FreeBSD.
The amd64 implementation is similar to the i386 one but there was initially no 32bit segment descriptor used for this purpose (hence not even native 32bit TLS users worked) so we had to add such a segment and implement its loading on every context switch (when a flag signaling use of 32bit is set). Apart from this the TLS loading is exactly the same just the segment numbers are different and the descriptor format and the loading differs slightly.
Threads need some kind of synchronization and POSIX® provides some of them: mutexes for mutual exclusion, read-write locks for mutual exclusion with biased ratio of reads and writes and condition variables for signaling a status change. It is interesting to note that POSIX® threading API lacks support for semaphores. Those synchronization routines implementations are heavily dependant on the type threading support we have. In pure 1:M (userspace) model the implementation can be solely done in userspace and thus be very fast (the condition variables will probably end up being implemented using signals, i.e. not fast) and simple. In 1:1 model, the situation is also quite clear - the threads must be synchronized using kernel facilities (which is very slow because a syscall must be performed). The mixed M:N scenario just combines the first and second approach or rely solely on kernel. Threads synchronization is a vital part of thread-enabled programming and its performance can affect resulting program a lot. Recent benchmarks on FreeBSD operating system showed that an improved sx_lock implementation yielded 40% speedup in ZFS (a heavy sx user), this is in-kernel stuff but it shows clearly how important the performance of synchronization primitives is.
Threaded programs should be written with as little contention on locks as possible. Otherwise, instead of doing useful work the thread just waits on a lock. Because of this, the most well written threaded programs show little locks contention.
Linux® implements 1:1 threading, i.e. it has to use in-kernel synchronization primitives. As stated earlier, well written threaded programs have little lock contention. So a typical sequence could be performed as two atomic increase/decrease mutex reference counter, which is very fast, as presented by the following example:
pthread_mutex_lock(&mutex); .... pthread_mutex_unlock(&mutex);
1:1 threading forces us to perform two syscalls for those mutex calls, which is very slow.
The solution Linux® 2.6 implements is called futexes. Futexes implement the check for contention in userspace and call kernel primitives only in a case of contention. Thus the typical case takes place without any kernel intervention. This yields reasonably fast and flexible synchronization primitives implementation.
The futex syscall looks like this:
int futex(void *uaddr, int op, int val, struct timespec *timeout, void *uaddr2, int val3);
In this example uaddr
is an address of the
mutex in userspace, op
is an operation we are
about to perform and the other parameters have per-operation
meaning.
Futexes implement the following operations:
FUTEX_WAIT
FUTEX_WAKE
FUTEX_FD
FUTEX_REQUEUE
FUTEX_CMP_REQUEUE
FUTEX_WAKE_OP
This operation verifies that on address
uaddr
the value val
is written. If not, EWOULDBLOCK
is
returned, otherwise the thread is queued on the futex and gets
suspended. If the argument timeout
is
non-zero it specifies the maximum time for the sleeping,
otherwise the sleeping is infinite.
This operation takes a futex at uaddr
and wakes up val
first futexes queued
on this futex.
This operation takes val
threads
queued on futex at uaddr
, wakes them up,
and takes val2
next threads and requeues them
on futex at uaddr2
.
This operation does the same as
FUTEX_REQUEUE
but it checks that
val3
equals to val
first.
This operation performs an atomic operation on
val3
(which contains coded some other value)
and uaddr
. Then it wakes up
val
threads on futex at
uaddr
and if the atomic operation returned a
positive number it wakes up val2
threads on
futex at uaddr2
.
The operations implemented in
FUTEX_WAKE_OP
:
FUTEX_OP_SET
FUTEX_OP_ADD
FUTEX_OP_OR
FUTEX_OP_AND
FUTEX_OP_XOR
There is no val2
parameter in the
futex prototype. The val2
is taken from the
struct timespec *timeout
parameter
for operations FUTEX_REQUEUE
,
FUTEX_CMP_REQUEUE
and
FUTEX_WAKE_OP
.
The futex emulation in FreeBSD is taken from NetBSD and further
extended by us. It is placed in linux_futex.c
and linux_futex.h
files. The
futex
structure looks like:
struct futex { void *f_uaddr; int f_refcount; LIST_ENTRY(futex) f_list; TAILQ_HEAD(lf_waiting_paroc, waiting_proc) f_waiting_proc; };
And the structure waiting_proc
is:
struct waiting_proc { struct thread *wp_t; struct futex *wp_new_futex; TAILQ_ENTRY(waiting_proc) wp_list; };
A futex is obtained using the futex_get
function, which searches a linear list of futexes and returns the
found one or creates a new futex. When releasing a futex from the
use we call the futex_put
function, which
decreases a reference counter of the futex and if the refcount
reaches zero it is released.
When a futex queues a thread for sleeping it creates a
working_proc
structure and puts this structure
to the list inside the futex structure then it just performs a
tsleep(9) to suspend the thread. The sleep can be timed out.
After tsleep(9) returns (the thread was woken up or it timed
out) the working_proc
structure is removed
from the list and is destroyed. All this is done in the
futex_sleep
function. If we got woken up
from futex_wake
we have
wp_new_futex
set so we sleep on it. This way
the actual requeueing is done in this function.
Waking up a thread sleeping on a futex is performed in the
futex_wake
function. First in this function
we mimic the strange Linux® behaviour, where it wakes up N threads
for all operations, the only exception is that the REQUEUE
operations are performed on N+1 threads. But this usually does not
make any difference as we are waking up all threads. Next in the
function in the loop we wake up n threads, after this we check if
there is a new futex for requeueing. If so, we requeue up to n2
threads on the new futex. This cooperates with
futex_sleep
.
The FUTEX_WAKE_OP
operation is quite
complicated. First we obtain two futexes at addresses
uaddr
and uaddr2
then we
perform the atomic operation using val3
and
uaddr2
. Then val
waiters
on the first futex is woken up and if the atomic operation
condition holds we wake up val2
(i.e.
timeout
) waiter on the second futex.
The atomic operation takes two parameters
encoded_op
and uaddr
.
The encoded operation encodes the operation itself,
comparing value, operation argument, and comparing argument.
The pseudocode for the operation is like this one:
oldval = *uaddr2 *uaddr2 = oldval OP oparg
And this is done atomically. First a copying in of the number
at uaddr
is performed and the operation is
done. The code handles page faults and if no page fault occurs
oldval
is compared to
cmparg
argument with cmp comparator.
In this section I am going to describe some smaller syscalls that are worth mentioning because their implementation is not obvious or those syscalls are interesting from other point of view.
During development of Linux® 2.6.16 kernel, the *at syscalls
were added. Those syscalls (openat
for example)
work exactly like their at-less counterparts with the slight
exception of the dirfd
parameter. This
parameter changes where the given file, on which the syscall is to be
performed, is. When the filename
parameter is
absolute dirfd
is ignored but when the path to
the file is relative, it comes to the play. The
dirfd
parameter is a directory relative to which
the relative pathname is checked. The dirfd
parameter is a file descriptor of some directory or
AT_FDCWD
. So for example the
openat
syscall can be like this:
file descriptor 123 = /tmp/foo/, current working directory = /tmp/ openat(123, /tmp/bah\, flags, mode) /* opens /tmp/bah */ openat(123, bah\, flags, mode) /* opens /tmp/foo/bah */ openat(AT_FDWCWD, bah\, flags, mode) /* opens /tmp/bah */ openat(stdio, bah\, flags, mode) /* returns error because stdio is not a directory */
This infrastructure is necessary to avoid races when opening
files outside the working directory. Imagine that a process consists
of two threads, thread A and thread B. Thread A
issues open(./tmp/foo/bah., flags, mode)
and
before returning it gets preempted and thread B runs.
Thread B does not care about the needs of thread A and
renames or removes /tmp/foo/
. We got a race.
To avoid this we can open /tmp/foo
and use it
as dirfd
for openat
syscall. This also enables user to implement per-thread
working directories.
Linux® family of *at syscalls contains:
linux_openat
,
linux_mkdirat
,
linux_mknodat
,
linux_fchownat
,
linux_futimesat
,
linux_fstatat64
,
linux_unlinkat
,
linux_renameat
,
linux_linkat
,
linux_symlinkat
,
linux_readlinkat
,
linux_fchmodat
and
linux_faccessat
. All these are implemented
using the modified namei(9) routine and simple
wrapping layer.
The implementation is done by altering the
namei(9) routine (described above) to take
additional parameter dirfd
in its
nameidata
structure, which specifies the
starting point of the pathname lookup instead of using the
current working directory every time. The resolution of
dirfd
from file descriptor number to a
vnode is done in native *at syscalls. When
dirfd
is AT_FDCWD
the
dvp
entry in nameidata
structure is NULL
but when
dirfd
is a different number we obtain a
file for this file descriptor, check whether this file
is valid and if there is vnode attached to it then we get a vnode.
Then we check this vnode for being a directory. In the actual
namei(9) routine we simply substitute the
dvp
vnode for dp
variable
in the namei(9) function, which determines the
starting point. The namei(9) is not used
directly but via a trace of different functions on various
levels. For example the openat
goes like
this:
openat() --> kern_openat() --> vn_open() -> namei()
For this reason kern_open
and
vn_open
must be altered to incorporate
the additional dirfd
parameter. No compat
layer is created for those because there are not many users of
this and the users can be easily converted. This general
implementation enables FreeBSD to implement their own *at syscalls.
This is being discussed right now.
The ioctl interface is quite fragile due to its generality.
We have to bear in mind that devices differ between Linux® and FreeBSD
so some care must be applied to do ioctl emulation work right. The
ioctl handling is implemented in linux_ioctl.c
,
where linux_ioctl
function is defined. This
function simply iterates over sets of ioctl handlers to find a
handler that implements a given command. The ioctl syscall has three
parameters, the file descriptor, command and an argument. The
command is a 16-bit number, which in theory is divided into high
8 bits determining class of the ioctl command and low
8 bits, which are the actual command within the given set.
The emulation takes advantage of this division. We implement
handlers for each set, like sound_handler
or disk_handler
. Each handler has a maximum
command and a minimum command defined, which is used for determining
what handler is used. There are slight problems with this approach
because Linux® does not use the set division consistently so
sometimes ioctls for a different set are inside a set they should
not belong to (SCSI generic ioctls inside cdrom set, etc.). FreeBSD
currently does not implement many Linux® ioctls (compared to
NetBSD, for example) but the plan is to port those from NetBSD.
The trend is to use Linux® ioctls even in the native FreeBSD drivers
because of the easy porting of applications.
Every syscall should be debuggable. For this purpose we introduce a small infrastructure. We have the ldebug facility, which tells whether a given syscall should be debugged (settable via a sysctl). For printing we have LMSG and ARGS macros. Those are used for altering a printable string for uniform debugging messages.
As of April 2007 the Linux® emulation layer is capable of
emulating the Linux® 2.6.16 kernel quite well. The remaining
problems concern futexes, unfinished *at family of syscalls,
problematic signals delivery, missing epoll
and
inotify
and probably some bugs we have not
discovered yet. Despite this we are capable of running basically all
the Linux® programs included in FreeBSD Ports Collection with
Fedora Core 4 at 2.6.16 and there are some rudimentary
reports of success with Fedora Core 6 at 2.6.16. The
Fedora Core 6 linux_base was recently committed enabling
some further testing of the emulation layer and giving us some more
hints where we should put our effort in implementing missing
stuff.
We are able to run the most used applications like
www/linux-firefox,
www/linux-opera,
net-im/skype and some games from
the Ports Collection. Some of the programs exhibit bad behaviour
under 2.6 emulation but this is currently under investigation and
hopefully will be fixed soon. The only big application that is
known not to work is the Linux® Java™ Development Kit and this is
because of the requirement of epoll
facility which is not directly related to the Linux®
kernel 2.6.
We hope to enable 2.6.16 emulation by default some time after FreeBSD 7.0 is released at least to expose the 2.6 emulation parts for some wider testing. Once this is done we can switch to Fedora Core 6 linux_base, which is the ultimate plan.
Future work should focus on fixing the remaining issues with
futexes, implement the rest of the *at family of syscalls, fix the
signal delivery and possibly implement the epoll
and inotify
facilities.
We hope to be able to run the most important programs flawlessly soon, so we will be able to switch to the 2.6 emulation by default and make the Fedora Core 6 the default linux_base because our currently used Fedora Core 4 is not supported any more.
The other possible goal is to share our code with NetBSD and DragonflyBSD. NetBSD has some support for 2.6 emulation but its far from finished and not really tested. DragonflyBSD has expressed some interest in porting the 2.6 improvements.
Generally, as Linux® develops we would like to keep up with their
development, implementing newly added syscalls. Splice comes to mind
first. Some already implemented syscalls are also heavily crippled,
for example mremap
and others. Some performance
improvements can also be made, finer grained locking and others.
I cooperated on this project with (in alphabetical order):
John Baldwin <[email protected]>
Konstantin Belousov <[email protected]>
Emmanuel Dreyfus
Scot Hetzel
Jung-uk Kim <[email protected]>
Alexander Leidinger <[email protected]>
Suleiman Souhlal <[email protected]>
Li Xiao
David Xu <[email protected]>
I would like to thank all those people for their advice, code reviews and general support.
Marshall Kirk McKusick - George V. Nevile-Neil. Design and Implementation of the FreeBSD operating system. Addison-Wesley, 2005.