Subversion Repositories HelenOS-doc

Rev

Rev 42 | Rev 78 | Go to most recent revision | Details | Compare with Previous | Last modification | View Log | RSS feed

Rev Author Line No. Line
30 jermar 1
\chapter{Software}
2
\label{tools}
3
 
4
During the development of the HelenOS operating system, we came across
5
several types of software tools, programs, utilities and libraries.
6
Some of the tools were used to develop the system itself while other tools
7
were used to faciliate the development process. In some cases, we had a chance
8
to try out several versions of the same product. Sometimes the new versions
9
contained fixes for bugs we had discovered in previous versions thereof.
10
 
11
Another group of software we have used has been integrated into HelenOS
12
to fill gaps after functionality that the genuine HelenOS code did
13
not provide itself.
14
 
15
There is simply too much third party software that is somehow related to
16
HelenOS to be covered all. This chapter attempts to present our experience
17
with the key softare tools, programs and libraries.
18
 
19
\section{Communication tools}
20
Although the developers know each other in person, the development, with the
21
exception of kernel camps, has been pretty much independent as far as locality
22
and time goes. In order to work effectively, we have established several communication
23
channels:
24
 
25
\begin{description}
26
\item [E-mail] --- We used this basic means of electronic communication for peer-to-peer
27
discussion in cases when the other person could not have been reached on-line at
28
the time his advice was needed or his attention was demanded. E-mail was also
29
used for contacting developers of third party software that we needed to talk to.
30
 
31
\item [Mailing list] --- As almost every open source project before us, also we opened
32
mailing list for technical discussion. The advantage of having a mailing list is
33
the fact that it enables multilateral discussions on several topics contemporarily,
34
without the need for all the participants be on-line or even at one place. We have kept
35
our first development mailing list closed to public so that it seemed natural to us
36
to use Czech as our communication language on the list since Czech, with one exception,
37
is our native language and all of us speak it very well. Besides all the advantages,
38
there are also disadvantages. First, communication over mailing list tends to be rather
39
slow, compared for instance to ICQ. Second, because of its implicit collective nature,
40
it sometimes tends to be so slow that an answer for a given question never comes.
41
 
42
Apart from the internal development mailing list, we have also used another mailing list
43
for commit log messages which proved handy in keeping developers informed about all changes in
44
the repository.
45
 
46
Finally, we have also established a public mailing list for communication
47
about general HelenOS topics in English.
48
 
49
\item [ICQ] --- Because we divided the whole project into smaller subprojects on which
50
only the maximum of two people out of six would work together, the need for communication
51
among all six people was significantly smaller than the need to communicate between the two
52
developers who tightly cooperated on a specific task. For this reason, we made the biggest
53
use of ICQ.
54
\end{description}
55
 
56
\section{Concurrent versions systems}
57
At the very beginning, when the SPARTAN kernel was being developed solely
58
by \JJ, there was not much sence in using any software for management of
59
concurrent versions. However, when the number of developers increased to six,
60
we immediately started to think of available solutions.
61
 
62
We have begun with CVS because it is probably the best known file concurrent
63
versions system. We have even had repository of HelenOS using CVS for a short time,
64
but when we learned about its weaknesses we sought another solution. There are two
65
weaknesses that have prevented us from using CVS:
66
 
67
\begin{itemize}
68
\item it is merely a file concurrent versions system (i.e. CVS is
69
good at managing versions of each separate file in the repository
70
but has no clue about the project's directory tree as a whole;
71
specifically renaming of a file while preserving its revision history
72
is next to impossible),
73
 
74
\item it lacks atomic commits (i.e. should your commit conflict with
75
another recent commit of another developer, CVS would not abort the whole operation
76
but render the repository inconsistent instead).
77
\end{itemize}
78
 
79
Being aware of these limitations, we decided to go with Subversion. Subversion
80
is, simply put, a redesigned CVS with all the limitations fixed. We were
81
already familiar with CVS so the switch to Subversion was pretty seamless.
82
 
83
As for Subversion itself, it has worked for us well and has met all our
84
expectations. Despite all its pros, there was a serious problem that
85
occurred sometime in the middle of the development process. Because of some locking
86
issues related to the default database backend (i.e. {\tt Berkeley DB}),
87
our Subversion repository put itself in a peculiar state in which it became
88
effectivelly inaccessible by any means of standard usage or administration.
89
To mitigate this problem, we had to manually delete orphaned file locks
90
and switch to backend called {\tt fsfs} which doesn't suffer this
91
problem.
92
 
93
Other than that, we are happy users of Subversion. The ability to switch
94
the entire working copy to particular revision is a great feature
95
for debugging. Once we tracked a bug three months into the past by
96
moving through revisions until we found the change that caused the bug.
97
 
98
\section{Web tools}
99
On our project website\cite{helenos}, we provided links to different
100
web utilities that either functioned to access our Subversion repository
101
or mailing list or provided another services:
102
 
103
\begin{description}
104
\item [Chora] is a part of the Horde framework and can be used to comfortably
105
browse Subversion repository from the web. We altered it a little bit to also
106
show number of commits per developer on our homepage.
107
 
33 jermar 108
\item [Whups] is another component of the Horde framework. It provides
30 jermar 109
feature request and bug tracking features. However, in the light of being rather
110
closed group of people, we used this tool only seldomly. On the other hand,
111
any possible beta tester of our operating system has had a chance to
112
submit bug reports.
113
 
114
\item [Mailman] is a web interface to the mailing list we utilized. It allows
115
to control subsriptions and search mailing list archives on-line.
116
\end{description}
117
 
118
\section{Third party components of HelenOS}
119
HelenOS itself contains third party software. In the first place, amd64 and ia32 architectures
120
make use of GNU Grub boot loader. This software replaced the original limited boot loader
121
after the Kernel Camp 2005 when {\MD} had made HelenOS Multiboot specification compliant. Because of
122
Grub, HelenOS can be booted from several types of devices. More importantly, we use
123
Grub to load HelenOS userspace modules as well.
124
 
125
Another third-party piece of the HelenOS operating system is the userspace {\tt malloc()}.
126
Rather than porting our kernel slab allocator to userspace, we have chosen Doug Lea's public
127
domain {\tt dlmalloc} instead. This allocator could be easily integrated into our uspace tree
128
and has proven itself in other projects as well. Its derivative, {\tt ptmalloc}, has been part of the
129
GNU C library for some time. However, the version we are using is not optimized for SMP and multithreading.
130
We plan to eventually replace it with another allocator.
131
 
36 jermar 132
Finally, the {\tt pci} userspace task is using the {\tt libpci} library. The
133
library was simplified and ported to HelenOS. Even though filesystem
134
calls were removed from the library, it still heavily depends on {\tt libc}.
135
By porting {\tt libpci} to HelenOS, we demonstrated that applications and libraries
136
are, given enough effort, portable to HelenOS.
137
 
30 jermar 138
\section{Build tools}
139
Assembler, linker and compiler are by all means the very focal point of attention
140
of all operating system projects. Quality of these tools influences
141
operating system performance and, what is more important, stability. HelenOS has
142
been tailored to build with GNU {\tt binutils} (i.e. the assembler and linker) and GNU~{\tt gcc}
143
(i.e. the compiler). There is only little chance that it could be compiled and
144
linked using some other tools unless those tools are compatible with the GNU build tools.
145
 
146
As our project declares support for five different processor architectures,
147
we needed to have five different flavors of the build utilities installed.
148
Interestingly, flavors of {\tt binutils} and {\tt gcc} for particular architecture
149
are not equal from the point of view of cross-binutils and cross-compiler installation.
150
All platforms except ia64 require only the {\tt binutils} package and the {\tt gcc} package
151
for the cross-tool to be built. On the other hand, ia64 requires also some excerpts from
152
the ia64-specific part of {\tt glibc}.
153
 
154
Formerly, the project could be compiled with almost any version of {\tt binutils} starting with 2.15
155
and {\tt gcc} starting with 2.95, but especially after we added partial thread local storage
156
support into our userspace layer, some architectures (e.g. mips32) will not compile even with {\tt gcc} 4.0.1
51 jermar 157
and demand {\tt gcc} 4.1.0 or newer.
30 jermar 158
 
159
As for the mips32 cross-compiler, {\OP} discovered a bug in {\tt gcc} (ticket \#23824) which caused {\tt gcc} to
160
incorrectly generate unaligned data access instructions (i.e. {\tt lwl}, {\tt lwr}, {\tt swl} and {\tt swr}).
161
 
162
As for the mips32 cross-binutils\footnote{It remains uninvestigated whether this problem also shows with other cross-tools.},
163
we observed that undefined symbols are not reported when we don't link using the standard target. We are still not
164
sure whether this was a bug --- {\tt binutils} developers just told us to use the standard target and then use
165
{\tt objcopy} to convert the ELF binary into requested output format.
166
 
167
\section{Virtual environments}
168
After the build tools, simulators, emulators and virtualizers were the second focal point
169
in our project. These invaluable programs really sped the code-compile-test cycle.
170
In some cases, they were, and still are, the only option to actually run HelenOS on certain
171
processor architectures, because real hardware was not available to us. Using virtual environment
33 jermar 172
for developing our system provided us with deterministic environment on which it is much easier to do
30 jermar 173
troubleshooting. Moreover, part of the simulators featured integrated debugging facilities.
174
Without them, a lot of bugs would remain unresolved or even go unnoticed.
175
 
42 jermar 176
Using several virtual environments for testing one architecture is well justified by the
177
fact that sometimes HelenOS would run on two and crash on third or vice versa. Sometimes
178
we found that it runs on real hardware but fails in a simulator. The opposite case was,
179
however, more common. Simply put, the more configurations, no matter whether real or virtual,
180
the better.
181
 
30 jermar 182
From one point of view, we have tested our system on eight different virtual environments:
183
 
184
\begin{itemize}
185
\item Bochs,
186
\item GXemul,
187
\item msim,
188
\item PearPC,
189
\item QEMU,
190
\item Simics,
191
\item Ski,
192
\item VMware.
193
\end{itemize}
194
 
195
From the second point of view, we have tested these programs by our operating system.
196
Because of the scope and uniqueness of this testing and because we did find some issues,
197
we want to dedicate some more space to what we have found.
198
 
199
\subsection{Bochs}
200
Bochs has been used to develop the SPARTAN kernel since its beginning in 2001.
201
It is capable of emulating ia32 machine and for some time also amd64.
202
Bochs is an emulator and thus the slowest from virtual environments capable
203
of simulating the same cathegory of hardware. On the other hand, it is extremely
204
portable, compared to much faster virtualizers and emulators using dynamic translation
205
of instructions. Lately, there have been some plans to develop or port dynamic translation
206
to Bochs brewing in its developer community.
207
 
208
The biggest virtue of Bochs is that it has traditionally supported SMP. For some time, Bochs
33 jermar 209
has been our only environment on which we could develop and test SMP code. Unfortunatelly,
30 jermar 210
the quality of SMP support in Bochs was different from version to version. Because of SMP
211
breakage in Bochs, we had to avoid some versions thereof. So far, Bochs versions 2.2.1 and 2.2.6
212
have been best in this regard.
213
 
214
Our project has not only used Bochs. We also helped to identify some SMP related problems
215
and {\OP} from our team has discovered and also fixed a bug in FXSAVE and FXRSTOR emulation
216
(patch \#1282033).
217
 
218
Bochs has some debugging facilities but those have been very impractical and broken
42 jermar 219
in SMP mode. Moreover, it is possible to use the GNU debugger {\tt gbd} to connect to running
220
simulation, but this has also proven not very useful as we often needed to debug
221
problems that existed only in multiprocessor configurations, which {\tt gdb}
222
does not understand.
30 jermar 223
 
224
\subsection{GXemul}
225
GXemul is an emulator of several processor architectures. Nevertheless, we have
226
used it only for mips32 emulation in both little-endian and big-endian modes.
227
It seems to be pretty featurefull and evolving but we don't use all its functionality.
228
GXemul is very user friendly and has debugging features. It is more realistic
229
than msim. However, our newly introduced TLS support triggered a bug in the {\tt rdhwr}
230
instruction emulation while msim functioned as expected. Fortunatelly, the author
231
of GXemul is very cooperative and has fixed the problem for future versions as well as
232
provided a quick hack for the old version.
233
 
234
\subsection{msim}
235
msim has been our first mips32 simulator. It simulates 32-bit side of R4000 processor.
236
Its simulated environment is not very realistic, but the processor simulation
237
is good enough for operating system development. In this regard, the simulator is
238
comparable to HP's ia64 simulator Ski. Another similar aspect of these two is
239
relatively strong debugger.
240
 
241
Msim has been developed on the same alma mater as our own project.
242
All members of our team know this program from operating system courses.
243
Curiously, this simulator contained the biggest number of defects and inaccuracies
244
that we have ever discovered in a simulator.  Fortunately, all of them have been
245
eventually fixed.
246
 
247
\subsection{PearPC}
33 jermar 248
PearPC is the only emulator on which we have run ppc32 port of HelenOS. It has
30 jermar 249
no debugging features, but fortunatelly its sources are available under
250
an open source license. This enabled {\OP} and {\MD} to alter its sources
251
in a way that this modified version allowed some basic debugging.
252
 
253
\subsection{QEMU}
254
QEMU emulates several processor architectures. We have used it to emulate
255
ia32 and amd64. It can simulate SMP, but contrary to Bochs, it uses dynamic
256
translation of emulated instructions and performs much better because of
257
that.
258
 
32 jermar 259
This emulator seemed to realistically emulate the {\tt hlt} instruction,
260
which was nice for those of us who use notebooks as their development
261
machine.
262
 
42 jermar 263
Similar to Bochs, QEMU simulation can be aided by {\tt gdb}. Debugging
264
with {\tt gdb} can be pretty comfortable\footnote{Especially when the kernel is
265
compiled with {\tt -g3}.} until one needs to debug a SMP kernel running on multiple
266
processors.
267
 
30 jermar 268
\subsection{Simics}
33 jermar 269
Virtutech's Simics simulator can be compared to a Swiss-army knife for operating system debugging.
32 jermar 270
This proprietary piece of software was available to us under an academic license for free.
271
 
272
Simics can be set to simulate many different configurations of many different machines.
273
It has the most advanced debugging features we have ever seen. To highlight some, its
274
memory access tracing ability has been really helpfull to us. During device driver
275
development, we appreciated the possibility to turn logging of the devices to a specified
276
verbosity.
277
 
278
We used it to test and develop amd64 and ia32 architectures in SMP mode and mips32 architecture in UP mode.
279
 
280
Regardless of its invaluable qualities, it has still contained bugs. One of the most
281
serious was bug with ticket \#3351. {\OP} discovered that its BIOS rewrites kernel memory
282
during application processors start. Another bugs found were related to amd64 and mips32.
283
As for amd64, Simics did not report general protection fault when {\tt EFER.NXE} was 0 and a non-executable
284
page was found (\#4214). As for mips32, Simics misemulated {\tt MSUB} and {\tt MSUBU} instructions.
285
 
30 jermar 286
\subsection{Ski}
33 jermar 287
The ia64 port of HelenOS has been developed and debugged on the HP's IA-64 Ski simulator.
288
Ski is just an Itanium processor simulator and as such does not simulate a real machine. In fact, there
289
is no firmware and no configuration tables (e.g. memory map) present in Ski! On the other hand, the missing parts can be supplied externally\footnote{This
290
is actually how Linux runs in this simulator.}. The simulator provides means of interaction with
291
host system devices via Simulator SystemCalls (SSC). The simulator itself has graphical interface
292
with pretty powerful, but not as good as those of Simics, debugging facilities.
293
 
294
Ski is a proprietary program with no source code available. Its binaries are available
295
for free under a non-free license. It comes packaged with insufficient documentation
296
which makes the development pretty problematic. For instance, there is no public documentation
297
of all the SSC's. All one can do is to look into Linux/ia64-Ski port, which was written by the
298
same people as Ski, and use it as a refernce. We had to look into Linux once more when our kernel
299
started to fail in some memory-intensive stress tests. In fact, the problem was that the tests
300
hit the IA-32 legacy videoram area. We fixed the problem, in the light of absence of any memory map, by blacklisting
301
this piece of memory to our frame allocator.
302
 
303
The way HelenOS is booted on Ski is by simply loading its ELF image
304
and jumping to it. The ELF header contains two fields describing where and how to load the program image into memory:
305
VMA and LMA. VMA\footnote{Virtual Memory Address} is an address where the program's segment gets mapped in virtual memory.
306
LMA\footnote{Load Memory Address} is the physical address where the segment is loaded in memory. {\JV} discovered
307
that Ski confuses VMA and LMA. This, what we believe to be a bug in Ski, has not shown in Linux since Linux always has
308
LMA equal to VMA. People from the Ski mailing list had tried to help us but our repeated problem report didn't
309
make it far enough for the HP to fix or at least clarify the issue. Finally, we adopted a workaround implemented by {\JJ}
310
that simply swaps LMA and the program entry point in the kernel ELF image.
311
 
42 jermar 312
\subsection{VMware} VMware is the only virtualizer we have used in
313
HelenOS development. It virtualizes the ia32 host machine. Since VMware
314
version 5.5, we made use of its possibility to run the guest system
315
(i.e. HelenOS) on multiple processors. VMware has no support for
316
debugging but is very useful for compatibility and regression testing
317
because it's closest to the real hardware. VMware, being a virtualizer,
318
is also the fastest of all the virtual environments we have utilized.
30 jermar 319
 
33 jermar 320