On Tue, 2011-02-08 at 13:16 +0100, Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote:
> Philippe Gerum wrote:
> > On Tue, 2011-02-08 at 13:09 +0100, Gilles Chanteperdrix wrote:
> >> Philippe Gerum wrote:
> >>> On Tue, 2011-02-08 at 10:10 +0100, Henri Roosen wrote:
> >>>> On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 9:38 AM, Philippe Gerum <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>>> On Tue, 2011-02-08 at 09:21 +0100, Henri Roosen wrote:
> >>>>>> On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 8:08 PM, Gilles Chanteperdrix
> >>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>>>>> Henri Roosen wrote:
> >>>>>>>> On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 7:27 PM, Gilles Chanteperdrix
> >>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> Henri Roosen wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> We are using signal handlers for catching exceptions which our
> >>>>>>>>>> application is allowed to make and which we know how to handle.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> The current Xenomai implementation is to switch to the secondary
> >>>>>>>>>> domain and call the handlers from there.
> >>>>>>>>>> Unfortunately this takes too much time for our application and we
> >>>>>>>>>> would like to handle the exception without the switch to the 
> >>>>>>>>>> secondary
> >>>>>>>>>> domain, in primary domain.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Can anyone give some advice how to implement that?
> >>>>>>>>>> Will "user-space signals" which was planned for Xenomai 2.6 
> >>>>>>>>>> fulfill this need?
> >>>>>>>>>> Is there already code available for user-space signals?
> >>>>>>>>> In the 2.5 series, we added some code to support signals. The 
> >>>>>>>>> signals
> >>>>>>>>> are multiplexed per-skin in kernel-space, and demultiplexed in
> >>>>>>>>> user-space, upon exit of system calls. We implemented a unit test of
> >>>>>>>>> this functionality with the "sigtest" skin and user-space test, but 
> >>>>>>>>> they
> >>>>>>>>> only work upon return from system calls.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Then we added support for the "mayday" page, which made us realize, 
> >>>>>>>>> that
> >>>>>>>>> maybe implementing signals handling at any time, not only when 
> >>>>>>>>> returning
> >>>>>>>>> from system calls, was possible. But then came the realization that 
> >>>>>>>>> in
> >>>>>>>>> order to implement that, we would have to fiddle with the FPU, 
> >>>>>>>>> which is
> >>>>>>>>> an area where we have a certain tradition for not getting the things
> >>>>>>>>> right at the first attempt. So, we kind of stopped here.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> So, if you want some ad-hoc signals upon return from system call, 
> >>>>>>>>> the
> >>>>>>>>> task is pretty easy. If you want the full posix signals interface, 
> >>>>>>>>> then
> >>>>>>>>> things are going to be a bit harder.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> I am afraid it's going to be a bit harder; we would need it when the
> >>>>>>>> exception occurs and that is in most cases not at a place in the code
> >>>>>>>> where there is a system call :-(.
> >>>>>>> What kind of exception is it? Could not the exception be signalled at
> >>>>>>> the next system call?
> >>>>>> Our customers provide the application code, we provide more or less
> >>>>>> the framework. Customers can install exception handlers for for
> >>>>>> instance floating point exceptions (SIGFPE).
> >>>>>> Besides that we provide a means of tracing the application code, which
> >>>>>> is handled by breakpoints in the code which then does some bookkeeping
> >>>>>> and lets the task run again. Of course that has some overhead also
> >>>>>> when using our old OS, but Linux-Xenomai has so much overhead because
> >>>>>> of the secondary domain switch. Therefore we would like to handle it
> >>>>>> in primary domain.
> >>>>> Connect a high priority shadow task in userland to an exception handler
> >>>>> installed in kernel space via some synchronization (semaphore, event,
> >>>>> whatever). The handler would be called upon exception, then would wake
> >>>>> up your task in userland, which would preempt immediately any other task
> >>>>> activity due to its higher priority. This would not entail any mode
> >>>>> switch, only a fast context switch between Xenomai contexts.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Over this "exception server" task context, you should be able to execute
> >>>>> any kind of user-space handler to mimic the POSIX signal interface as
> >>>>> much as required. Of course this would not run over the faulting context
> >>>>> like POSIX signals do (unless SIGEV_THREAD is used), but this might be
> >>>>> ok for your purpose.
> >>>>>
> >>>> Unfortunately we do need the faulting context for the SIGFPE signal
> >>>> and SIGTRAP (x86) / SIGILL (arm) signals...
> >>>
> >>> It's too much to ask in the current implementation. There is no quick
> >>> fix to this, I mean if you want to have a standard signal frame to
> >>> exploit in userland. Otherwise, you could pull some relevant bits from
> >>> the exception frame in kernel space (you have the struct pt_regs of the
> >>> faulting context avail there), and pass them through your
> >>> synchronization mechanism to userland, so as to fake some kind of
> >>> pseudo-signal frame.
> >> All this is certainly doable, but even without Xenomai, going to
> >> kernel-space in case of exception then building a signal frame, going
> >> back to user-space, executing the signal handler, then returning from
> >> the signal (possibly going to kernel-space again) is not exactly a light
> >> operation. So, surely, exceptions should remain exceptional and using
> >> them routinely does not look like the right thing to do.
> > 
> > No, you missed the point. The idea is not to forge a stack frame in
> > kernel space. The idea is to propagate enough information to userland in
> > order to provide whatever bits are needed there.
> 
> I was not talking about the Xenomai case specifically, but since Henri
> would like to have the full signals implementation with Xenomai, this
> does a apply to Xenomai too.
> 
> 

I think we all agree that having a complete signal implementation for
Xenomai in pure rt mode won't happen overnight. So the point is now: how
could it be mimicked, at least for the most useful part.

-- 
Philippe.



_______________________________________________
Xenomai-help mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/xenomai-help

Reply via email to