-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 29.8k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
src: allocate Buffer memory using ArrayBuffer allocator #26207
Conversation
CI: https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-pull-request/20894/ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM with a nit
@@ -470,6 +476,36 @@ enum class DebugCategory { | |||
CATEGORY_COUNT | |||
}; | |||
|
|||
// A unique-pointer-ish object that is compatible with the JS engine's | |||
// ArrayBuffer::Allocator. | |||
struct AllocatedBuffer { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
AllocatedLibuvBuffer
? Or instead of storing a uv_buf_t
as member, store the fields that can be used to wrap/unwrap uv_buf_t
?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
AllocatedLibuvBuffer
?
So, I’m not super happy with the name either. I wouldn’t want to include a reference to libuv, because uv_but_t
was just chosen here as a nicer variant of std::pair<char*,size_t>
that happens to work nicely with some pieces in our code base that already use it the same way.
Ideally, the name would be something that refers to the fact that this memory is usable for ArrayBuffer
s, but that would make any name even longer … ArrayBufferBuffer
sounds weird, ArrayBufferStorage
or ArrayBufferMemory
is long but maybe okay, …?
Or instead of storing a
uv_buf_t
as member, store the fields that can be used to wrap/unwrapuv_buf_t
?
I don’t really have strong feelings about that… I can make that change after/while rebasing (later today, after #26201 lands).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
because
uv_but_t
was just chosen here as a nicer variant ofstd::pair<char*,size_t>
that happens to work nicely with some pieces in our code base that already use it the same way.
That was what I guessed as well, thanks for the explanation. I don't have strong feelings about using uv_buf_t
underneath, but it would be nice to mention why it is chosen in the comments as one may think that AllocatedBuffer
depends on libuv for a more sophisticated reason.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@joyeecheung Does 1e17828 sound good to you?
(& to be clear, I’m still happy about suggestions for another name for this class if that fits better.)
BTW: if we are refactoring the allocation methods used across the code base, is it possible to create allocation methods that take an |
I think so, but this PR doesn’t change a lot of other code that still uses our |
Original commit message: [api] Add `Isolate::GetArrayBufferAllocator()` This allows non-monolithic embedders to always allocate memory for ArrayBuffer instances using the right allocation method. This is based on a patch that Electron is currently using. Refs: https://github.com/electron/electron/blob/1898f9162073910c05958295c612deec6121a892/patches/common/v8/array_buffer.patch Change-Id: I39a614343118a0594aab48699a99cc2aad5b7ba9 Reviewed-on: https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/1462003 Reviewed-by: Yang Guo <[email protected]> Commit-Queue: Yang Guo <[email protected]> Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#59697} Refs: v8/v8@d3308d0
This enables us to identify whether we are using an allocator that we know more about than what the generic `ArrayBuffer::Allocator` API provides, in particular whether it is `malloc()`-compatible.
If the `ArrayBuffer::Allocator` used to create `ArrayBuffer`s in the current `Isolate` is not a Node.js `ArrayBufferAllocator`, we cannot know that it is `malloc()`-based, an in particular it might not be compatible with the `ArrayBuffer::Allocator` on the receiving end of the connection.
Add a subclass of `ArrayBufferAllocator` that performs additional debug checking, which in particular verifies that: - All `ArrayBuffer` backing stores have been allocated with this allocator, or have been explicitly marked as coming from a compatible source. - All memory allocated by the allocator has been freed once it is destroyed.
Add a RAII utility for managing blocks of memory that have been allocated with the `ArrayBuffer::Allocator` for a given `Isolate`.
d548f49
to
3106a0c
Compare
Always use the right allocator for memory that is turned into an `ArrayBuffer` at a later point. This enables embedders to use their own `ArrayBuffer::Allocator`s, and is inspired by Electron’s electron/node@f61bae3440e. It should render their downstream patch unnecessary. Refs: electron/node@f61bae3
3106a0c
to
a55092f
Compare
Landed in b0869c6...84e02b1, thanks for the reviews! |
Original commit message: [api] Add `Isolate::GetArrayBufferAllocator()` This allows non-monolithic embedders to always allocate memory for ArrayBuffer instances using the right allocation method. This is based on a patch that Electron is currently using. Refs: https://github.com/electron/electron/blob/1898f9162073910c05958295c612deec6121a892/patches/common/v8/array_buffer.patch Change-Id: I39a614343118a0594aab48699a99cc2aad5b7ba9 Reviewed-on: https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/1462003 Reviewed-by: Yang Guo <[email protected]> Commit-Queue: Yang Guo <[email protected]> Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#59697} Refs: v8/v8@d3308d0 PR-URL: #26207 Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Joyee Cheung <[email protected]>
This enables us to identify whether we are using an allocator that we know more about than what the generic `ArrayBuffer::Allocator` API provides, in particular whether it is `malloc()`-compatible. PR-URL: #26207 Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Joyee Cheung <[email protected]>
If the `ArrayBuffer::Allocator` used to create `ArrayBuffer`s in the current `Isolate` is not a Node.js `ArrayBufferAllocator`, we cannot know that it is `malloc()`-based, an in particular it might not be compatible with the `ArrayBuffer::Allocator` on the receiving end of the connection. PR-URL: #26207 Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Joyee Cheung <[email protected]>
Add a subclass of `ArrayBufferAllocator` that performs additional debug checking, which in particular verifies that: - All `ArrayBuffer` backing stores have been allocated with this allocator, or have been explicitly marked as coming from a compatible source. - All memory allocated by the allocator has been freed once it is destroyed. PR-URL: #26207 Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Joyee Cheung <[email protected]>
Add a RAII utility for managing blocks of memory that have been allocated with the `ArrayBuffer::Allocator` for a given `Isolate`. PR-URL: #26207 Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Joyee Cheung <[email protected]>
Always use the right allocator for memory that is turned into an `ArrayBuffer` at a later point. This enables embedders to use their own `ArrayBuffer::Allocator`s, and is inspired by Electron’s electron/node@f61bae3440e. It should render their downstream patch unnecessary. Refs: electron/node@f61bae3 PR-URL: #26207 Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Joyee Cheung <[email protected]>
Original commit message: [api] Add `Isolate::GetArrayBufferAllocator()` This allows non-monolithic embedders to always allocate memory for ArrayBuffer instances using the right allocation method. This is based on a patch that Electron is currently using. Refs: https://github.com/electron/electron/blob/1898f9162073910c05958295c612deec6121a892/patches/common/v8/array_buffer.patch Change-Id: I39a614343118a0594aab48699a99cc2aad5b7ba9 Reviewed-on: https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/1462003 Reviewed-by: Yang Guo <[email protected]> Commit-Queue: Yang Guo <[email protected]> Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#59697} Refs: v8/v8@d3308d0 PR-URL: nodejs#26207 Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Joyee Cheung <[email protected]>
This enables us to identify whether we are using an allocator that we know more about than what the generic `ArrayBuffer::Allocator` API provides, in particular whether it is `malloc()`-compatible. PR-URL: nodejs#26207 Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Joyee Cheung <[email protected]>
If the `ArrayBuffer::Allocator` used to create `ArrayBuffer`s in the current `Isolate` is not a Node.js `ArrayBufferAllocator`, we cannot know that it is `malloc()`-based, an in particular it might not be compatible with the `ArrayBuffer::Allocator` on the receiving end of the connection. PR-URL: nodejs#26207 Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Joyee Cheung <[email protected]>
Add a subclass of `ArrayBufferAllocator` that performs additional debug checking, which in particular verifies that: - All `ArrayBuffer` backing stores have been allocated with this allocator, or have been explicitly marked as coming from a compatible source. - All memory allocated by the allocator has been freed once it is destroyed. PR-URL: nodejs#26207 Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Joyee Cheung <[email protected]>
Add a RAII utility for managing blocks of memory that have been allocated with the `ArrayBuffer::Allocator` for a given `Isolate`. PR-URL: nodejs#26207 Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Joyee Cheung <[email protected]>
Always use the right allocator for memory that is turned into an `ArrayBuffer` at a later point. This enables embedders to use their own `ArrayBuffer::Allocator`s, and is inspired by Electron’s electron/node@f61bae3440e. It should render their downstream patch unnecessary. Refs: electron/node@f61bae3 PR-URL: nodejs#26207 Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Joyee Cheung <[email protected]>
Original commit message: [api] Add `Isolate::GetArrayBufferAllocator()` This allows non-monolithic embedders to always allocate memory for ArrayBuffer instances using the right allocation method. This is based on a patch that Electron is currently using. Refs: https://github.com/electron/electron/blob/1898f9162073910c05958295c612deec6121a892/patches/common/v8/array_buffer.patch Change-Id: I39a614343118a0594aab48699a99cc2aad5b7ba9 Reviewed-on: https://chromium-review.googlesource.com/c/1462003 Reviewed-by: Yang Guo <[email protected]> Commit-Queue: Yang Guo <[email protected]> Cr-Commit-Position: refs/heads/master@{#59697} Refs: v8/v8@d3308d0 PR-URL: #26207 Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Joyee Cheung <[email protected]> Backport-PR-URL: #26302 Reviewed-By: Michaël Zasso <[email protected]>
This enables us to identify whether we are using an allocator that we know more about than what the generic `ArrayBuffer::Allocator` API provides, in particular whether it is `malloc()`-compatible. PR-URL: #26207 Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Joyee Cheung <[email protected]> Backport-PR-URL: #26302 Reviewed-By: Michaël Zasso <[email protected]>
If the `ArrayBuffer::Allocator` used to create `ArrayBuffer`s in the current `Isolate` is not a Node.js `ArrayBufferAllocator`, we cannot know that it is `malloc()`-based, an in particular it might not be compatible with the `ArrayBuffer::Allocator` on the receiving end of the connection. PR-URL: #26207 Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Joyee Cheung <[email protected]> Backport-PR-URL: #26302 Reviewed-By: Michaël Zasso <[email protected]>
Add a subclass of `ArrayBufferAllocator` that performs additional debug checking, which in particular verifies that: - All `ArrayBuffer` backing stores have been allocated with this allocator, or have been explicitly marked as coming from a compatible source. - All memory allocated by the allocator has been freed once it is destroyed. PR-URL: #26207 Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Joyee Cheung <[email protected]> Backport-PR-URL: #26302 Reviewed-By: Michaël Zasso <[email protected]>
Add a RAII utility for managing blocks of memory that have been allocated with the `ArrayBuffer::Allocator` for a given `Isolate`. PR-URL: #26207 Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Joyee Cheung <[email protected]> Backport-PR-URL: #26302 Reviewed-By: Michaël Zasso <[email protected]>
Always use the right allocator for memory that is turned into an `ArrayBuffer` at a later point. This enables embedders to use their own `ArrayBuffer::Allocator`s, and is inspired by Electron’s electron/node@f61bae3440e. It should render their downstream patch unnecessary. Refs: electron/node@f61bae3 PR-URL: #26207 Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Joyee Cheung <[email protected]> Backport-PR-URL: #26302 Reviewed-By: Michaël Zasso <[email protected]>
Track received data correctly. Specifically, for the buffer that is used for receiving data, we previously would try to increment the current memory usage by its length, and later decrement it by that, but in the meantime the buffer had been turned over to V8 and its length reset to zero. This gave the impression that more and more memory was consumed by the HTTP/2 session when it was in fact not. Fixes: nodejs#27416 Refs: nodejs#26207
Track received data correctly. Specifically, for the buffer that is used for receiving data, we previously would try to increment the current memory usage by its length, and later decrement it by that, but in the meantime the buffer had been turned over to V8 and its length reset to zero. This gave the impression that more and more memory was consumed by the HTTP/2 session when it was in fact not. Fixes: #27416 Refs: #26207 PR-URL: #27914 Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Rich Trott <[email protected]>
Track received data correctly. Specifically, for the buffer that is used for receiving data, we previously would try to increment the current memory usage by its length, and later decrement it by that, but in the meantime the buffer had been turned over to V8 and its length reset to zero. This gave the impression that more and more memory was consumed by the HTTP/2 session when it was in fact not. Fixes: #27416 Refs: #26207 PR-URL: #27914 Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Rich Trott <[email protected]>
Track received data correctly. Specifically, for the buffer that is used for receiving data, we previously would try to increment the current memory usage by its length, and later decrement it by that, but in the meantime the buffer had been turned over to V8 and its length reset to zero. This gave the impression that more and more memory was consumed by the HTTP/2 session when it was in fact not. Fixes: nodejs/node#27416 Refs: nodejs/node#26207 PR-URL: nodejs/node#27914 Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Rich Trott <[email protected]>
Always use the right allocator for memory that is turned into an `ArrayBuffer` at a later point. This enables embedders to use their own `ArrayBuffer::Allocator`s, and is inspired by Electron’s f61bae3440e. It should render their downstream patch unnecessary. Refs: f61bae3 PR-URL: nodejs/node#26207 Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Joyee Cheung <[email protected]>
This enables us to identify whether we are using an allocator that we know more about than what the generic `ArrayBuffer::Allocator` API provides, in particular whether it is `malloc()`-compatible. PR-URL: nodejs/node#26207 Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Joyee Cheung <[email protected]>
If the `ArrayBuffer::Allocator` used to create `ArrayBuffer`s in the current `Isolate` is not a Node.js `ArrayBufferAllocator`, we cannot know that it is `malloc()`-based, an in particular it might not be compatible with the `ArrayBuffer::Allocator` on the receiving end of the connection. PR-URL: nodejs/node#26207 Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Joyee Cheung <[email protected]>
Add a subclass of `ArrayBufferAllocator` that performs additional debug checking, which in particular verifies that: - All `ArrayBuffer` backing stores have been allocated with this allocator, or have been explicitly marked as coming from a compatible source. - All memory allocated by the allocator has been freed once it is destroyed. PR-URL: nodejs/node#26207 Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Joyee Cheung <[email protected]>
Add a RAII utility for managing blocks of memory that have been allocated with the `ArrayBuffer::Allocator` for a given `Isolate`. PR-URL: nodejs/node#26207 Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Joyee Cheung <[email protected]>
Track received data correctly. Specifically, for the buffer that is used for receiving data, we previously would try to increment the current memory usage by its length, and later decrement it by that, but in the meantime the buffer had been turned over to V8 and its length reset to zero. This gave the impression that more and more memory was consumed by the HTTP/2 session when it was in fact not. Fixes: nodejs/node#27416 Refs: nodejs/node#26207 PR-URL: nodejs/node#27914 Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Rich Trott <[email protected]>
This PR allows using an
ArrayBuffer
allocator that was not provided by Node.js itself, and may not bemalloc()
-compatible.The target use case are embedders like Electron, which is currently floating patches on top of Node and V8 in order to achieve this (fyi @codebytere).
[The first commit is #26201 in order to avoid conflicts]
deps: V8: cherry-pick d3308d0
Original commit message:
Refs: v8/v8@d3308d0
src: make IsolateData store ArrayBufferAllocator
This enables us to identify whether we are using an
allocator that we know more about than what the generic
ArrayBuffer::Allocator
API provides, in particularwhether it is
malloc()
-compatible.worker: copy transferList ArrayBuffers on unknown allocator
If the
ArrayBuffer::Allocator
used to createArrayBuffer
sin the current
Isolate
is not a Node.jsArrayBufferAllocator
,we cannot know that it is
malloc()
-based, an in particular it mightnot be compatible with the
ArrayBuffer::Allocator
on the receivingend of the connection.
src: add debugging array allocator
Add a subclass of
ArrayBufferAllocator
that performs additionaldebug checking, which in particular verifies that:
ArrayBuffer
backing stores have been allocated with thisallocator, or have been explicitly marked as coming from a
compatible source.
destroyed.
src: add allocation utils to env
Add a RAII utility for managing blocks of memory that have
been allocated with the
ArrayBuffer::Allocator
for a givenIsolate
.src: allocate Buffer memory using ArrayBuffer allocator
Always use the right allocator for memory that is turned into
an
ArrayBuffer
at a later point.This enables embedders to use their own
ArrayBuffer::Allocator
s,and is inspired by Electron’s electron/node@f61bae3440e. It should
render their downstream patch unnecessary.
Refs: electron/node@f61bae3
Checklist
make -j4 test
(UNIX), orvcbuild test
(Windows) passes