-/* Copyright (c) 2007-2017. The SimGrid Team. All rights reserved. */
+/* Copyright (c) 2007-2018. The SimGrid Team. All rights reserved. */
/* This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify it
* under the terms of the license (GNU LGPL) which comes with this package. */
#include <csignal> /* Signal handling */
#include <cstdlib>
-#include <xbt/algorithm.hpp>
#include <xbt/functional.hpp>
#include <xbt/utility.hpp>
s_smx_timer_t(double date, simgrid::xbt::Task<void()> callback) : date(date), callback(std::move(callback)) {}
};
-void (*SMPI_switch_data_segment)(int) = nullptr;
+void (*SMPI_switch_data_segment)(simgrid::s4u::ActorPtr) = nullptr;
int _sg_do_verbose_exit = 1;
static void inthandler(int)
SIMIX_process_kill(process, nullptr);
}
-static std::function<void()> maestro_code;
namespace simgrid {
namespace simix {
simgrid::xbt::signal<void()> onDeadlock;
-XBT_PUBLIC(void) set_maestro(std::function<void()> code)
-{
- maestro_code = std::move(code);
-}
-
}
}
+static std::function<void()> maestro_code;
void SIMIX_set_maestro(void (*code)(void*), void* data)
{
#ifdef _WIN32
/**
* \ingroup SIMIX_API
* \brief Initialize SIMIX internal data.
- *
- * \param argc Argc
- * \param argv Argv
*/
void SIMIX_global_init(int *argc, char **argv)
{
if (not simix_global) {
simix_global = std::unique_ptr<simgrid::simix::Global>(new simgrid::simix::Global());
-
- simgrid::simix::ActorImpl proc;
- simix_global->process_to_destroy = xbt_swag_new(xbt_swag_offset(proc, destroy_hookup));
simix_global->maestro_process = nullptr;
simix_global->create_process_function = &SIMIX_process_create;
simix_global->kill_process_function = &kill_process;
// Either create a new context with maestro or create
// a context object with the current context mestro):
- simgrid::simix::create_maestro(maestro_code);
+ simgrid::kernel::actor::create_maestro(maestro_code);
/* Prepare to display some more info when dying on Ctrl-C pressing */
signal(SIGINT, inthandler);
#endif
/* Kill all processes (but maestro) */
- SIMIX_process_killall(simix_global->maestro_process, 1);
+ SIMIX_process_killall(simix_global->maestro_process);
SIMIX_context_runall();
SIMIX_process_empty_trash();
/* Free the remaining data structures */
simix_global->process_to_run.clear();
simix_global->process_that_ran.clear();
- xbt_swag_free(simix_global->process_to_destroy);
+ simix_global->process_to_destroy.clear();
simix_global->process_list.clear();
- simix_global->process_to_destroy = nullptr;
xbt_os_mutex_destroy(simix_global->mutex);
simix_global->mutex = nullptr;
#if SIMGRID_HAVE_MC
xbt_dynar_free(&simix_global->actors_vector);
+ xbt_dynar_free(&simix_global->dead_actors_vector);
#endif
/* Let's free maestro now */
/** Wake up all processes waiting for a Surf action to finish */
static void SIMIX_wake_processes()
{
- surf_action_t action;
-
for (auto const& model : *all_existing_models) {
+ simgrid::kernel::resource::Action* action;
+
XBT_DEBUG("Handling the processes whose action failed (if any)");
while ((action = surf_model_extract_failed_action_set(model))) {
XBT_DEBUG(" Handling Action %p",action);
/* Here, the order is ok because:
*
- * Short proof: only maestro adds stuff to the process_to_run array, so the execution order of user contexts do not impact its order.
+ * Short proof: only maestro adds stuff to the process_to_run array, so the execution order of user contexts do
+ * not impact its order.
*
* Long proof: processes remain sorted through an arbitrary (implicit, complex but fixed) order in all cases.
*
* - if there is no kill during the simulation, processes remain sorted according by their PID.
- * rational: This can be proved inductively.
- * Assume that process_to_run is sorted at a beginning of one round (it is at round 0: the deployment file is parsed linearly).
+ * Rationale: This can be proved inductively.
+ * Assume that process_to_run is sorted at a beginning of one round (it is at round 0: the deployment file
+ * is parsed linearly).
* Let's show that it is still so at the end of this round.
* - if a process is added when being created, that's from maestro. It can be either at startup
* time (and then in PID order), or in response to a process_create simcall. Since simcalls are handled
* - If a process gets added to process_to_run because one of their blocking action constituting the meat
* of a simcall terminates, we're still good. Proof:
* - You are added from SIMIX_simcall_answer() only. When this function is called depends on the resource
- * kind (network, cpu, disk, whatever), but the same arguments hold. Let's take communications as an example.
+ * kind (network, cpu, disk, whatever), but the same arguments hold. Let's take communications as an
+ * example.
* - For communications, this function is called from SIMIX_comm_finish().
* This function itself don't mess with the order since simcalls are handled in FIFO order.
* The function is called:
* - before the comm starts (invalid parameters, or resource already dead or whatever).
* The order then trivial holds since maestro didn't interrupt its handling of the simcall yet
- * - because the communication failed or were canceled after startup. In this case, it's called from the function
- * we are in, by the chunk:
+ * - because the communication failed or were canceled after startup. In this case, it's called from
+ * the function we are in, by the chunk:
* set = model->states.failed_action_set;
- * while ((synchro = xbt_swag_extract(set)))
+ * while ((synchro = extract(set)))
* SIMIX_simcall_post((smx_synchro_t) synchro->data);
* This order is also fixed because it depends of the order in which the surf actions were
* added to the system, and only maestro can add stuff this way, through simcalls.
* We thus use the inductive hypothesis once again to conclude that the order in which synchros are
- * poped out of the swag does not depend on the user code's execution order.
+ * poped out of the set does not depend on the user code's execution order.
* - because the communication terminated. In this case, synchros are served in the order given by
* set = model->states.done_action_set;
- * while ((synchro = xbt_swag_extract(set)))
+ * while ((synchro = extract(set)))
* SIMIX_simcall_post((smx_synchro_t) synchro->data);
* and the argument is very similar to the previous one.
- * So, in any case, the orders of calls to SIMIX_comm_finish() do not depend on the order in which user processes are executed.
- * So, in any cases, the orders of processes within process_to_run do not depend on the order in which user processes were executed previously.
+ * So, in any case, the orders of calls to SIMIX_comm_finish() do not depend on the order in which user
+ * processes are executed.
+ * So, in any cases, the orders of processes within process_to_run do not depend on the order in which
+ * user processes were executed previously.
* So, if there is no killing in the simulation, the simulation reproducibility is not jeopardized.
* - If there is some process killings, the order is changed by this decision that comes from user-land
- * But this decision may not have been motivated by a situation that were different because the simulation is not reproducible.
+ * But this decision may not have been motivated by a situation that were different because the simulation is
+ * not reproducible.
* So, even the order change induced by the process killing is perfectly reproducible.
*
* So science works, bitches [http://xkcd.com/54/].
*
- * We could sort the process_that_ran array completely so that we can describe the order in which simcalls are handled
- * (like "according to the PID of issuer"), but it's not mandatory (order is fixed already even if unfriendly).
+ * We could sort the process_that_ran array completely so that we can describe the order in which simcalls are
+ * handled (like "according to the PID of issuer"), but it's not mandatory (order is fixed already even if
+ * unfriendly).
* That would thus be a pure waste of time.
*/
XBT_CRITICAL("Oops ! Deadlock or code not perfectly clean.");
SIMIX_display_process_status();
+ simgrid::s4u::onDeadlock();
xbt_abort();
}
simgrid::s4u::onSimulationEnd();
*/
smx_timer_t SIMIX_timer_set(double date, void (*callback)(void*), void *arg)
{
- smx_timer_t timer = new s_smx_timer_t(date, [callback, arg]() { callback(arg); });
+ smx_timer_t timer = new s_smx_timer_t(date, simgrid::xbt::makeTask([callback, arg]() { callback(arg); }));
timer->handle_ = simix_timers.emplace(std::make_pair(date, timer));
return timer;
}
if (boost::dynamic_pointer_cast<simgrid::kernel::activity::IoImpl>(process->waiting_synchro) != nullptr)
synchro_description = "I/O";
- XBT_INFO("Process %lu (%s@%s): waiting for %s synchro %p (%s) in state %d to finish", process->pid,
+ XBT_INFO("Process %ld (%s@%s): waiting for %s synchro %p (%s) in state %d to finish", process->pid,
process->getCname(), process->host->getCname(), synchro_description, process->waiting_synchro.get(),
process->waiting_synchro->name.c_str(), (int)process->waiting_synchro->state);
}
else {
- XBT_INFO("Process %lu (%s@%s)", process->pid, process->getCname(), process->host->getCname());
+ XBT_INFO("Process %ld (%s@%s)", process->pid, process->getCname(), process->host->getCname());
}
}
}
