Re: Native_capability as [out] parameters

[Daniel W. <dan...@ac...>]

Hi Stefan,
OK, I think this clears things up for me - the hazards of Genode hacking! ;)

Thanks for your help as always,
Daniel

On 02/19/2013 02:15 AM, Stefan Kalkowski wrote:
> Hi Daniel,
>
> On 02/19/2013 01:38 AM, Daniel Waddington wrote:
>> Hi Stefan,
>>
>> In my test server side session function, if I use a core-created
>> capability (via alloc_irq) it works.  If I try to do similar behavior
>> locally, the capability appears to be valid (i.e., it exists in the jdb
>> object table) but will not martial correctly - .valid() fails at the
>> client side (note my server process has L4_BASE_FACTORY_CAP).
>>
>> Can you enlighten me? I am clearly doing something wrong.
>>
> I see. Well that's the reason I recommended to put such a service into
> core to you ;-).
> The point of the matter is: although your self constructed capabilities
> have valid indices of the capability name space controlled by the
> kernel, they have invalid IDs (alias "local_name"s). These IDs are
> Genode specific, and have nothing to do with the kernel API. They are
> used to find capabilities, a task already owns. Therefore, all
> capabilities are stored in a task-local AVL tree. The IDs are used as
> keys in the AVL tree. A capability without a proper ID (ID == 0) is
> treated as an invalid capability. When you try to marshal a capability
> into the message buffer, it is checked whether you try to transfer an
> invalid capability or not. Without that check, the kernel would pollute
> the debug messages with a lot of warnings about capability transfers
> that failed. If it is an invalid one, no mapping gets established.
> That's why no capability is transfered in your case.
>
> I see two opportunities to solve that problem:
> First, you implement a proper service in core, or use the existing ones
> (e.g.: Cpu_session::alloc_irq). If you've to implement your own service
> in core, or extend an existing one, you can use core's allocator for
> capability IDs: "Platform::cap_id_alloc()".
>
> If for some reason it is impassable for you to do this in core, you
> might allocate a capability via core's cap_session service for every
> capability you want to construct by hand. Thereby, you obtain an ID that
> is not used otherwise. But be careful, this is the path of pain. Because
> you have to get rid of the capability, allocated via core, in your
> task-local AVL tree before getting your own capability into it. This
> should be done via the smart pointer magic only. Don't remove a
> capability from the tree by hand, when you still have references to it!
> With other words, you have to get rid of all references to the
> capability allocated via core, so that its destructor will do the
> database removal for you. Later, when you want to free your capability
> again, you'll have to re-construct the capability allocated via core. So
> that you can go to core's cap_session service, and free it. Otherwise,
> you'll have a capability leak in core.
>
> Summing up, I hope I could convince you to implement variant number one ;-).
>
>> status_t Foo::Session_component::create(Genode::Native_capability&
>> result_cap)
>> {
>> #if WORKS
>>    Genode::Foc_cpu_session_client cpu(Genode::env()->cpu_session_cap());
>>    result_cap = cpu.alloc_irq();
>> #endif
>>
>> #if DOES_NOT_WORK
>>    Cap_index * i = Genode::cap_idx_alloc()->alloc_range(1);
>>
>>    l4_msgtag_t res = l4_factory_create_irq(L4_BASE_FACTORY_CAP, i->kcap());
>>    assert(!l4_error(res));
>>
>>    Genode::Native_capability ncap(i);
>>    result_cap = ncap;
>> #endif
>> }
>>
>>
>> BTW, I'm currently using Native_capabilities to test.  But I also do not
>> know how to convert from a Native_capability to a typed capability. ;-)
>> Can you show me?
> You can use the following method defined in
> "base/include/base/capability.h" for it:
>
> template <typename RPC_INTERFACE>
> Capability<RPC_INTERFACE>
> reinterpret_cap_cast(Untyped_capability const &untyped_cap);
>
> Best regards
> Stefan
>
>> Daniel
>>
>> On 02/18/2013 01:15 AM, Stefan Kalkowski wrote:
>>> Hi Daniel,
>>>
>>> On 02/14/2013 08:33 PM, Daniel Waddington wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>> Can I pass Native_capability types as [out] parameters using
>>>> "Native_capability *" type - with the cross-process mapping happening?
>>>> Most of the examples use only use the return value to do [out]
>>>> capabilities.  i.e. GENODE_RPC(Rpc_foo,int,foo,Genode::Native_capability
>>>> *) doesn't seem to work, but there might be something else afoot.
>>> actually it should work the way you've described it. I've tested it
>>> right now by extending the hello example the same way, and the
>>> capability was successfully transfered to the calling client as an argument.
>>> By the way, why do you use Native_capability instead of Capability?
>>> Although both should work, I would use the generic Capability class,
>>> especially in an interface.
>>>
>>> Best regards
>>> Stefan
>>>
>>>> Daniel
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> Free Next-Gen Firewall Hardware Offer
>>>> Buy your Sophos next-gen firewall before the end March 2013
>>>> and get the hardware for free! Learn more.
>>>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/sophos-d2d-feb
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Genode-main mailing list
>>>> Gen...@li...
>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/genode-main
>>>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> The Go Parallel Website, sponsored by Intel - in partnership with Geeknet,
>> is your hub for all things parallel software development, from weekly thought
>> leadership blogs to news, videos, case studies, tutorials, tech docs,
>> whitepapers, evaluation guides, and opinion stories. Check out the most
>> recent posts - join the conversation now. http://goparallel.sourceforge.net/
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Genode-main mailing list
>> Gen...@li...
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/genode-main
>>