I am wondering how a hypervisor using Intel's VMX / VT technology would simulate memory-mapped I/O (so that the guest could think it was performing memory mapped I/O againsta device).
I think the basic principle would be to set up the EPT page tables in such a way that the memory addresses in question would cause an EPT violation (i.e. VM exit) by setting them such that they cannot be read or written? However, the next question is how to process the VM exit. Such a VM-exit would fill out all the exit qualification reasons etc. including the guest-linear and guest-physical address etc. But what I am missing in these exit qualification fields is some field indicating - in case of a write instruction - the value that was attempted to be written and the size of the write. Likewise, for a read instruction it would be nice with some bit fields indicating the destination of the read, say a register or a memory location (in case of memory-to-memory string operations). This would make it very easy for the hypervisor to figure out what the guest was trying to do and then simulate the device behavior towards the guest.
But the trouble is, I can't find such fields among the exit qualifications. I can see an instruction pointer to where the faulting instruction is, so I could walk the page tables to read in the instruction and then decode it to understand the instruction, then simulate the I/O behavior. However, this requires the hypervisor to have a fairly complete picture of all x86 instructions, and be able to decode them. That seems to be quite a heavy burden on the hypervisor, and will also require it to stay current with later instruction additions. And the CPU should already have this information.
There's a chance that that I am missing these relevant fields because the documentation is quite extensive, but I have tried to search carefully but have not been able to find it. Maybe someone can point me in the right direction OR confirm that the hypervisor will need to contain an instruction decoder.
I believe most VMs decode the instruction. It's not actually that hard, and most VMs have software emulators to fallback on when the CPU VM extensions aren't available or up to the task. You don't need to handle every instruction, just those that can take memory operands, and you can probably ignore everything that isn't a 1, 2, or 4 byte memory operand since you're not likely to emulating device registers other than those sizes. (For memory mapped device buffers, like video memory, you don't want to be trapping every memory accesses because that's too slow, and so you'll have to take different approach.)
However, there is one way you can let the CPU do the work for you, but it's much slower then decoding the instruction itself and it's not entirely perfect. You can single step the instruction while temporarily mapping in a valid page of RAM. The VM exit will tell you the guest physical address access and whether it was a read or write. Unfortunately it doesn't reliably tell you whether it was read-modify-write instruction, those may just set the write flag, and with some device registers that can make a difference. It might be easier to copy the instruction (it can only be a most 15 bytes, but watch out for page boundaries) and execute it in the host, but that requires that you can map the page to same virtual address in the host as in the guest.
You could combine these techniques, decode the common instructions that are actually used to access memory mapped device registers, while using single stepping for the instructions you don't recognize.
Note that by choosing to write your own hypervisor you've put a heavy burden on yourself. Having to decode instructions in software is a pretty minor burden compared to the task of emulating an entire IBM PC compatible computer. The Intel virtualisation extensions aren't designed to make this easier, they're just designed to make it more efficient. It would be easier to write a pure software emulator that interpreted the instructions. Handling memory mapped I/O would be just a matter of dispatching the reads and writes to the correct function.
I don't know in details how VT-X works, but I think I see a flaw in your wishlist way it could work:
Remember that x86 is not a load/store machine. The load part of add [rdi], 2 doesn't have an architecturally-visible destination, so your proposed solution of telling the hypervisor where to find or put the data doesn't really work, unless there's some temporary location that isn't part of the guest's architectural state, used only for communication between the hypervisor and the VMX hardware.
To handle a read-modify-write instruction with a memory destination efficiently, the VM should do the whole thing with one VM exit. So you can't just provide separate load and store interfaces.
More importantly, handling atomic read-modify-writes is a special case. lock add [rdi], 2 can't just be done as a separate load and store.
I used log4j (v. 1) in the past and was glad to know that a major refactoring was done to the project, resulting in log4j 2, which solves the issues that plagued version 1.
I was wondering if I could use log4j 2 to write to data files, not only log files.
The application I will be soon developing will need to be able to receive many events from different sources and write them very fast either to a data file or to a database (I haven't decided which yet).
The thread that receives the events must not be blocked by I/O while attempting to write events, so log4j2's Asynchronous Loggers, based on the LMAX Disruptor library, will definitely fit this scenario.
Moreover, my application must be able to recover either from a 'not enough space on disk' or 'unable to reach database' conditions, when writing to a data file or to a database table, respectively. In other words, when the application runs out of disk space or the database is temporarily unavailable, my application needs to store events in memory and wait for storage to become available and when it does, write all waiting events to disk or database.
Do you think I can do this with log4j?
Many thanks for your help.
Regards,
Nuno Guerreiro
Yes.
I'm aware of at least one production implementation in a similar scenario, where in gathered events are written to disk at high throughput.
Write to a volume other than your system volume to minimize the chances of system crashes due to disk space overrun.
Upfront capacity planning can help in ensuring h/w configuration with adequate resources to handle projected average load and bursts, for a reasonable period of time.
Do not let the system run out of disk space :). Keep track of disk usage, and proactively drop older data in extreme circumstances.
Is it possible to constantly dump the memory of a process to record every change that is happening? For example if I have a program that modifies the contents of an array I'd like to know the contents of that array before some modification. I imagine a program could save the initial memory and then all changes in a file and I'd just search the file by the modified contents of the array which I know. Then I'd look for changes in that specific memory location before that moment and find the initial contents.
Does a program like that exist? If so, what program would you recommend?
EDIT: I wrote a program in C++ that captures packets of another process using pcap and I would like to know how these packets are constructed inside that program. I'm using Windows.
Notice that memory content is (or may be) changing a lot faster than what a disk is capable of writing.
Also, your question is OS specific. I guess that you are using Linux.
In all cases, design your application very early with your goals.
Perhaps you are looking for application checkpointing. If on Linux, consider BLCR.
Perhaps you are looking for some persistence mechanism. A possible way might be to explicitly persist the state of your application at some points in your program, which are executed frequently. Persistence of the call stack or of continuations is a difficult issue
You may want to use textual formats (like JSON) for serialization. You could be interested in database technology, either relational-SQL (e.g. Sqlite or PostGreSQL) or noSQL mongodb
Persistence and checkpointing may be related to garbage collection algorithms (notably copying GC).
Some language implementations are able to persist their entire heap. For example, in Common Lisp, the SBCL implementation offers save-lisp-and-die
For debugging, you might want watchpoints, or the gcore(1) command.
Notice that if you fork(2) your process and sleep or idle immediately the child process you are keeping in that child process a snapshot of your address space.
Read also about transactional memory & ACID properties
I have got an iPhone application where I archive permanent data in the documents folder of the application (arrays, dictionaries). I read/write from and to the documents folder quite frequently and I would like to know whether this is considered a bad habit. Wouldn't it be better if I had a singleton class, read and write to arrays there and then, only when the application quits, write this data to the documents folder ? I do not see/feel any performance issues right now on my iPhone 5, but I wanted to know whether this is a bad practise.
FLASH memory has limited write capability - a long time ago it was rated in some increment of thousands. Not sure where it is today.
That said, if your app is using the standard file system APIs, then the system is using the file cache, and you might open a file, read it then change it many times without the file system ever writing to flash. The system may sync to flash occasionally, but that process is opaque - no way to really know when or why iOS does it.
The UNIX APIs allow for syncing the file system cache to the storage system (iOS this is FLASH), but if you are not using that then you are probably not doing much I/O at all given what you say above.
Given the lack of Apple discouraging developers from writing to the file system, I for sure would not worry about this.
But, if you said you were writing gigabytes of image data every few minutes - well - that might be a problem.
Question:
Is there an easy way to get a list of types of resources that leak in a running application? IOW by connecting to an application ?
I know memproof can do it, but it slows down so much that the application won't even last a minute. Most taskmanager likes can show the number, but not the type.
It is not a problem that the check itself is catastrophic (halts the app process), since I can check with a taskmgr if I'm getting close (or at least I hope)
Any other insights on resource leak hunting (so not memory) is also welcomed.
Background:
I've an Delphi 7/2006/2009 app (compiles with all three) and after about a few week it starts acting funny. However only on one of the places it runs, on several other systems it runs till the power goes out.
I've tried to put in some debug code to narrow the problem down. and found out that the exception is EOutofResources on a save of a file. (the file save can happen thousands of times a day).
I have tried to reason out memory leaks (with fastmm), but since the dataflow is quite high (60MByte/s from gigabit industrial camera's), I can only rule out "creeping" memory leaks with fastmm, not quick flashes of memoryleaks that exhaust memory around the time it happens. If something goes wrong, the app fills memory in under half a minute.,
Main suspects are filehandles that are somehow left on some error and TMetafiles (which are streamed to these files). Minor suspects are VST, popupmenu and tframes
Updates:
Another possible tip: It ran fine for two years with D7, and now the problems are with Turbo Explorer (which I use for stable projects not converted to D2009 ).
Paul-Jan: Since it only happens once a week (and that can happen at night), information acquisition is slow. Which is why I ask this question, need to combine stuff for when I'm there thursday. In short: no I don't know 100% sure. I intend to bring the entire Systemtools collection to see if I can find something (because then it will be running for days). There is also a chance that I see open files. (maybe should try to find some mingw lsof and schedule it)
But the app sees very little GUI action (it is an machine vision inspection app), except screen refresh +/- 15/s which is tbitmap stretchdraw + tmetafile, but I get this error when saving to disk (TFileStream) handles are probably really exhausted. However in the same stream, TMetafile is also savetostreamed, something which later apps don't have anymore, and they can run from months.
------------------- UPDATE
I've searched and searched and searched, and managed to reproduce the problems in-vitro two or three times. The problems happened when memusage was +/- 256MB (the systems have 2GB), user objects 200, gdi objects 500, not one file more open than expected ).
This is not really exceptional. I do notice that I leak small amounts of handles, probably due to reparenting frames (something in the VCL seems to leak HPalette's), but I suspect the core cause is a different problem. I reuse TMetafile, and .clear it inbetween. I think clearing the metafile doesn't really (always?) resize the resource, eventually each metafile in the entire pool of tmetafile at maximum size, and with 20-40+ tmetafiles (which can be several 100ks each) this will hit the desktop heap limit.
That's theory, but I'll try to verify this by setting the desktop limit to 10MB at the customers, but it will be several weeks before I have confirmation if this changes anything. This theory also confirms why this machine is special (it's possible that this machine naturally has slightly larger metafiles on average). Occasionally freeing and recreating a tmetafile in the pool might also help.
Luckily all these problems (both tmetafile and reparenting) have already been designed out in newer generations of the apps.
Due to the special circumstances (and the fact that I have very limited test windows), this is going to be a while, but I decided to accept the desktop heap as an example for now (though the GDILeaks stuff was also somewhat useful).
Another thing that the audit revealed GDI-types usage in a thread (though only saving tmetafiles (that weren't used or connected otherwise) to streams.
------------- Update 2.
Increasing the desktop limit only seemed to minorly increase the time till the problem occurred.
Unfortunately, I won't be able to follow up on this further, since the machines were updated to a newer version of the framework that doesn't have the problem.
In summary I can only state what the three core modifications were going from the old to the new framework:
I no longer change screens by reparenting frames. I now work with forms that I hide and show. I changed this since I also had very rare crashes or exceptions (that could be clicked away) due to this. The crashes were all while operating the GUI though, not spontaneously like the main problem
The routine where the crash happened dealt with TMetafile. TMetafile has been designed out, and replace by a simpler own made format. (basically arrays with Opengl vertices)
Drawing no longer happened with tbitmap with a tmetafile overlay strechdrawn over it, but using OpenGL.
Of course it could be something else too, that got changed in the rewrite of the above parts, fixing some very nasty detail bug. It would have to be an extremely bad one, since I analysed the above system as much as I could.
Updated nov 2012 after some private mail discussion: In retrospect, the next step would have been adding a counter to the metafiles objects, and simply reinstantiate them every x * 1000 uses or so, and see if that changes anything. If you have similar problems, try to see if you can somewhat regularly destroy and reinitialize long living resources that are dynamically allocated.
There is a slim chance that the error is misleading. The VCL naively reports EOutOfResources if it is unable to obtain a DC for a window (see TWinControl.GetDeviceContext in Controls.pas).
I say "naively" because there are other reasons why GetDC() might return a NULL handle and the VCL should report the OS error, not assume an out of resources condition (there is a Windows version check required for this to be reliably possible, but the VCL could and should take of that too).
I had a situation where I was getting the EOutOfResources error as the result of a window handle becoming invalid. Once I'd discovered the true problem, finding the cause and fixing it was simple, but I wasted many, many hours trying to find a non-existent resource leak.
If possible I would examine the stack trace leading to this exception - if it is coming from TWinControl.GetDeviceContext then the problem may not be what you think (it's impossible to say what it might be of course, but eliminating the impossible is always the first step toward discovering the solution, no matter how improbable).
If they are GDI handle leaks you can have a look at MSDN Magazine January 2003 which uses the tool GDILeaks. Other tools are GDIObj or GDIView. Also see here.
Another source of EOutOfResources could be that the Desktop Heap is full. I've had that issue on busy terminal servers with large screens.
If there are lots of file handles you are leaking you could check out Process Explorer and have a look at the open file handles of your process and see any out of the ordinary. Or use WinDbg with the !htrace command.
I've run into this problem before. From what I've been able to tell, Delphi may throw an EOutOfResources any time the Windows API returns ERROR_NOT_ENOUGH_MEMORY, and (as the other answers here discuss) Windows may return ERROR_NOT_ENOUGH_MEMORY for a variety of conditions.
In my case, EOutOfResources was being caused by a TBitmap - in particular, TBitmap's call to CreateCompatibleBitmap, which it uses with its default PixelFormat of pfDevice. Apparently Windows may enforce fairly strict systemwide limits on the memory available for device-dependent bitmaps (see, e.g, this discussion), even if your system otherwise has plenty of memory and plenty of GDI resources. (These systemwide limits are apparently because Windows may allocate device-dependent bitmaps in the video card's memory.)
The solution is simply to use device-independent bitmaps (DIBs) instead (although these may not offer quite as good of a performance). To do this in Delphi, set TBitmap.PixelFormat to anything other than pfDevice. This KB article describes how to pick the optimal DIB format for a device, although I generally just use pf32Bit instead of trying to determine the optimal format for each of the monitors the application is displayed on.
Most of the times I saw EOutOfResources, it was some sort of handle leak.
Did you try something like MadExcept?
--jeroen
"I've tried to put in some debug code to narrow the problem down. and found out that the exception is EOutofResources on a save of a file. (the file save can happen thousands of times a day)."
I'm shooting in the dark here, but could it be that you're using the Windows API to (GetTempFileName) create a temp file and you're blowing out some file system indexes or forgetting to close a file handle?
Either way, I do agree that with your supposition about it being a file handle problem. That seems to be the most likely thing given your symptoms and diagnosis.
Also try to check handle count for the application with Process Explorer from SysInternals. Handle leaks can be very dangerous and they build slowly through time.
I am currently having this problem, in software that is clearly not leaking any handles in my own code, so if there are leaks they could be happening in a component's source code or the VCL sourcecode itself.
The handle count and GDI and user object counts are not increasing, nor is anything being created. Deltic's answer shows corner cases where the message is kind of a red-herring, and Allen suggests that even a file write can cause this error.
So far, The best strategy I have found for hunting them down is to use either JCL JCLDEBUG stack tracebacks, or the exception report save features in MadExcept to generate the context information to find out what is actually failing.
Secondly, AQTime contains many tools to help you, including a resource profiler that can keep the links between where the code that created the resources is, and how it was called, along with counts of the total numbers of handles. It can grab results MID RUN and so it is not limited to detecting unfreed resources after you exit. So, run AQTime, do a results capture in mid run, wait several hours, and capture again, and you should have two points in time to compare handle counts. Just in case it is the obvious thing. But as Deltics wisely points out, this exception class is raised in cases where it probably shouldn't have been.
I spent all of today chasing this issue down. I found plenty of helpful resources pointing me in the direction of GDI, with the fact that I'm using GDI+ to produce high-speed animations directly onto the main form via timer/invalidate/onpaint (animation performed in separate thread). I also have a panel in this form with some dynamically created controls for the user to make changes to the animation.
It was extremely random and spontaneous. It wouldn't break anywhere in my code, and when the error dialog appeared, the animation on the main form would continue to work. At one point, two of these errors popped up at the same time (as opposed to sequential).
I carefully observed my code and made sure I wasn't leaking any handles related to GDI. In fact, my entire application tends to keep less than 300 handles, according to Task Manager. Regardless, this error would randomly pop up. And it would always correspond with the simplest UI related action, such as just moving the mouse over a standard VCL control.
Solution
I believe I have solved it by changing the logic to performing the drawing within a custom control, rather than directly to the main form as I had been doing before. I think the fact that I was rapidly drawing on the same form canvas which shared other controls, somehow they interfered. Now that it has its own dedicated canvas to draw on, it seems to be perfectly fixed.
That is with about 1 hour of vigorous testing at least.
[Fingers crossed]