Bless me, Yon Schemish, for I have Schemed.
It has been 14 months since my last confession and I now have a
not-entirely-unstable SMP branch. Edwin seems to be working quite
well, and --processors 2 continues to get it done in ~60% of the time.
I have to turn the timer interrupts way up and hit E
> From: Taylor R Campbell
> Date: Thu, 20 Aug 2015 16:57:25 +
>
> [...]
> The safe way to do this is:
>
> (let ((p (cons item constant-space-queue)))
> (membar-write)
> (set! constant-space-queue p))
>
> (let ((queue constant-space-queue))
> (membar-read)
> (if (and (not (eq? '() qu
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2015 17:36:38 -0700
From: Matt Birkholz
> From: Taylor R Campbell
> Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2015 22:39:22 +
>
> [...] or prove that the memory barriers are not necessary for other
> reasons.
I thought we were all cool with assuming word-sized memory cohe
> From: Taylor R Campbell
> Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2015 22:39:22 +
>
> [...] or prove that the memory barriers are not necessary for other
> reasons.
I thought we were all cool with assuming word-sized memory coherency.
Doesn't the x86-64 architecture guarantee that a word like constant-
space-qu
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2015 18:40:09 -0700
From: Matt Birkholz
> From: Taylor R Campbell
> Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2015 22:41:36 +
>
> The use of WITHOUT-INTERRUPTS in gcfinal.scm was largely for interrupt
> safety, not just for exclusion between threads, so that hitting ^G at
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2015 16:35:59 -0700
From: Matt Birkholz
> From: Taylor R Campbell
> Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2015 22:32:20 +
>
> [...] unless you've changed the way keyboard interrupts work so that
> they are actually delivered by thread events, that change breaks the
> m
> From: Taylor R Campbell
> Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2015 22:41:36 +
>
> The use of WITHOUT-INTERRUPTS in gcfinal.scm was largely for interrupt
> safety, not just for exclusion between threads, so that hitting ^G at
> an inopportune moment would not leak scarce resources. Please restore
> that prop
> From: Taylor R Campbell
> Date: Tue, 18 Aug 2015 22:32:20 +
>
> [...] unless you've changed the way keyboard interrupts work so that
> they are actually delivered by thread events, that change breaks the
> major reason why we care about interrupt safety in the first place.
I think we're OK
The use of WITHOUT-INTERRUPTS in gcfinal.scm was largely for interrupt
safety, not just for exclusion between threads, so that hitting ^G at
an inopportune moment would not leak scarce resources. Please restore
that property of it with appropriate WITHOUT-INTERRUPTION.
___
commit 4781c478630f3c19373aea69cca3d2efac8154ee
Author: Matt Birkholz
Date: Tue Jun 23 11:42:13 2015 -0700
But there is no need for default/gc-flip to remove items from the
queue. Flush-purification-queue! will know that its queue is "empty"
when its head is in constant space
You seem to have replaced WITHOUT-INTERRUPTS by
WITH-THREAD-EVENTS-BLOCKED (via WITHOUT-INTERRUPTION). I don't think
that's correct even under the assumption that it is to be used only
for interrupt safety and not exclusion of other threads.
In particular, I don't think it blocks keyboard interru
> From: Friar Puck
> Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2015 16:01:13 -0700
>
> > From: Friar Puck
> > Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2014 13:03:25 -0700
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > Encouraging results are just what SOMEONE needs when going in the ring
> > with up to 104(!) possible demons in the guise of without-interrupts.
> >
Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2015 16:02:15 -0700
From: Friar Puck
> From: Taylor R Campbell
> Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2015 20:50:54 +
>
> HASH-TABLE/CLEAN! probably shouldn't cons.
Then it shouldn't call maybe-shrink-table! and cons a shorter vector
:-(but not one bucket pair). If we
> From: Taylor R Campbell
> Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2015 20:50:54 +
>
>Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2015 13:14:47 -0700
>From: Friar Puck
>
>The first use of without-interruption is in hash-table/clean!. I
>don't see the need. An abort during a cleaning should be harmless.
>Each splice p
Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2015 20:50:54 +
From: Taylor R Campbell
Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2015 13:14:47 -0700
From: Friar Puck
I considered that, but the abstraction seemed generally useful (and
widely neglected), Scheme mutexes are cheap to create, and more are
better,
Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2015 13:14:47 -0700
From: Friar Puck
The first use of without-interruption is in hash-table/clean!. I
don't see the need. An abort during a cleaning should be harmless.
Each splice produces a valid bucket. Only new-size! really needs to
protect against an abo
> From: Taylor R Campbell
> Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2015 23:54:09 +
>
>Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2015 16:34:41 -0700
>From: Friar Puck
>
>OK. The without-interrupts in hashtb.scm are actually spelled
>"with-table-locked". I replaced them with "without-interruption".
>The critical sect
Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2015 16:34:41 -0700
From: Friar Puck
OK. The without-interrupts in hashtb.scm are actually spelled
"with-table-locked". I replaced them with "without-interruption".
The critical sections could probably be narrowed if aborts are now the
sole concern.
I'm not s
> From: Taylor R Campbell
> Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2015 23:13:58 +
>
> [...]
>
> Correct. Same with, e.g., the WITHOUT-INTERRUPTS in hashtb.scm.
OK. The without-interrupts in hashtb.scm are actually spelled
"with-table-locked". I replaced them with "without-interruption".
The critical section
Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2015 16:01:13 -0700
From: Friar Puck
The condvar.scm file already serializes its operations, yet still uses
without-interrupts, presumably for another reason. I am guessing that
the intention is to stave off "aborts" or ANY keyboard interrupt that
could eventu
> From: Friar Puck
> Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2014 13:03:25 -0700
>
> [...]
>
> Encouraging results are just what SOMEONE needs when going in the ring
> with up to 104(!) possible demons in the guise of without-interrupts.
> And that's just the runtime system.
As The Reformation grinds along, I find t
> From: Friar Puck
> Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2014 13:22:47 -0700
>
> [...] And SOMEONE should look at every global variable in the
> microcode. Each deserves to be thread-local or protected by
> explicit serialization. [...]
Another rebase, another progress update: SOMEONE has sorted the
microcode.
Bless me, Schemers, for I have Schemed.
It has been 19 months since my last confession and I collapse wave
functions with you now only because of a potent portent of fascinating
fun.
Brothers, rejoice with me! I have an SMP world running multiple
Scheme machines! So far they only execute an SMP
> From: Matt Birkholz
> Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2014 12:29:38 -0700
>
> The following short(?) script might be useful(?) for finding references
> to the 38(!) global bindings that have changed.
Or maybe this is more generally applicable:
grep -iE
'\*default-pathname-defaults\*|\*parser-associate-pos
The following short(?) script might be useful(?) for finding references
to the 38(!) global bindings that have changed.
;;; Set working directory to your build directory, e.g.:
(cd "linux-i386/src/6001/")
;;; The build directory should have cref/generate-constructors or
;;; somesuch run in it, e.
> From: Matt Birkholz
> Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2014 13:39:59 -0700
>
> [...] Now is the time to say "Whoa!"
The fluidization patches have been in master for almost 2 months now.
If there is any wailing or gnashing of teeth going on out there, y'all
are being creepy-silent about it.
Just in case you
9.2 is out there now, so I pushed the first example few of a couple
dozen more patches "fluidizing" runtime/ -- replacing fluid-let with
let-fluids and fluid objects. I chose let-fluids over parameterize
only because it requires no new syntax. If I was certain how anyone
was building from source
I meant compliance with that part of R7RS. I don't expect us to have full
compliance any time soon.
On Sun, Jan 19, 2014 at 9:58 AM, Matt Birkholz wrote:
> > From: Chris Hanson
> > Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2014 22:40:01 -0800
> >
> > R7RS defines parameters, which we'll eventually need to implement a
On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 4:16 AM, Taylor R Campbell wrote:
>Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2014 10:58:15 -0700
>From: Matt Birkholz
>
>> From: Chris Hanson
>> Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2014 22:40:01 -0800
>>
>> R7RS defines parameters, which we'll eventually need to implement
> anyway
>> f
Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2014 10:58:15 -0700
From: Matt Birkholz
> From: Chris Hanson
> Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2014 22:40:01 -0800
>
> R7RS defines parameters, which we'll eventually need to implement anyway
> for compliance. Converting the system's bindings over to parameters is
>
> From: Chris Hanson
> Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2014 22:40:01 -0800
>
> R7RS defines parameters, which we'll eventually need to implement anyway
> for compliance. Converting the system's bindings over to parameters is
> probably the right thing for a variety of reasons.
Then I will stick it to master,
R7RS defines parameters, which we'll eventually need to implement anyway
for compliance. Converting the system's bindings over to parameters is
probably the right thing for a variety of reasons.
On Fri, Jan 17, 2014 at 5:49 AM, Taylor R Campbell wrote:
>Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2014 20:00:54 -0700
Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2014 20:00:54 -0700
From: Matt Birkholz
If we want SMP(?) and don't want it in a distant fork, we might just
bite the bullet and replace our fluid bindings with fluid objects
(like e.g. s48's). That's an assq on each reference but the thread-
local values are
I just branched from master with the following commit message.
Add configure option --enable-smp.
Arrange for multiple Scheme machines, "processors", (pthreads) to
share the heap. Each gets its own stack and "local" heap areas.
Gc-flips trace the stacks and evacuate the local hea
34 matches
Mail list logo
