users-prolog
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: FFI experimentation, some advice please...


From: Daniel Diaz
Subject: Re: FFI experimentation, some advice please...
Date: Mon, 08 Jul 2013 09:59:00 +0200
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130623 Thunderbird/17.0.7

Hi,

I understand the problem you state but it is due to the fact that you want to provide all libld functionalities at the Prolog level. I'm not sure it is a good idea. Allowing the user to load arbitrarily an dynamic lib and invoke any function provided by the lib can be very dangerous: we are handling pointers as simple Prolog integers. Btw a C pointer cannot be safely casted to a Prolog integer which use some bits (currently 3) for the tag (e.g. on a 32 bits machine, gprolog integers are on 29 bits).

I'm however convinced that it is important to provide Prolog built-in predicates to load a Prolog module dynamically (I don't mean "consult" but load a natively compiled Prolog module). Such built-ins would rely on dlopen,dlsym (or equivalent functions under windows) internally but they would not be directly accessible by the user (except if he use the C interface obviously). To be loadable a Prolog source file should be compiled by gplc in a specific way to provide a dynamic lib (.so ou .dll under windows). I'm working on this with the introduction of a module system for gprolog.

Daniel

Le 05/07/2013 00:56, Sean Charles a écrit :
Without pasting *all* my code, I have wrapped dlopen/dlclose/dlsym and dlerror and then added this to my C code base:

typedef int (*FUNCPTR)(int,int);

PlBool
ffi_call2(PlLong fn, PlLong n1, PlLong n2, PlLong* result)
{
  FUNCPTR callee = (FUNCPTR)fn;
  *result = (*callee)( (int)n1, (int)n2 );
  return PL_TRUE;
}

and in my interface test file I have this:

:- foreign( dlopen( +codes, -positive ),           [ fct_name( gp_dlopen )]).
:- foreign( dlclose( +positive ),                  [ fct_name( gp_dlclose )]).
:- foreign( dlclose_strict( +positive ),           [ fct_name( gp_dlclose_strict )]).
:- foreign( dlerror( -string ),                    [ fct_name( gp_dlerror )]).
:- foreign( dlsym( +positive, +codes, -positive ), [ fct_name( gp_dlsym )]).

%% This is to test the "add2" function to establish the protocol...
:- foreign( ffi_call2( +positive, +positive, +positive, -positive )).

and finally, some actual prolog test code and the output…
test1(N1,N2,Result) :-
        ( dlopen("libtest.so", H)
        ->
          dlsym(H, "add2", F),
          test2(F,N1,N2,Result),
          dlclose(H)
        ;
          dlerror(M),
          format("ERROR: ~a~n", [M])
        ).
%% Proves I can pass "F" around and it still work mightily...
test2(F,N1,N2,Result) :-
    ffi_call2(F, N1, N2, Result).

and finally the output:
| ?- test1(100,333,X).
dlsym: handle:7fd1b2c19b10, symbol: add2 ==> 109349f50

X = 433

yes

Hurrah, it works. The extra output is a printf() in the C code just to show what's going on.

That's all fine and well but as it is right now I would have to create lots of "FUNCPTR" variations to cope with all the possible signature types… obviously unworkable as this is intended to be a dynamic system. The question then is what is the most effective way to allow call-site code to arbitrarily load a library, grab a function and then call it with prolog terms as arguments?

I can use FIOArg* as the input, I can use a list of them to cope with multiple functions and assume the last one is a return value. IFF there is a return value. Now you see the enormity of the task, how to generalise a call to any function that takes any number of differing types of arguments and may or may not return something on the stack or be "void".

I think the the ultimate answer is some filthy dirt raw assembler code that pushes stuff onto the stack and then does the call and tidies up the stack frame etc. I don't mind doing that but I was hoping that seeing as how "foreign" already exists and gplc does such an amazing job that there might be code "inside the box" that I can re-use for this. I would dearly love to create a generic FFI for GNU Prolog that we could then use to wrap and call any externally available C library.

Of course, the calling code will know the context of what it is trying to do and can supply the necessary information which led me to some dreamt up vapour code that might look like this:

    ffi_call( "lib test.so", int( add2( int(100), int(333))), Result).
    ffi_callV( "lib test.so", add2( int(100), int(333)))). %% callV => VOID, no return value

Inside my C code I could then pick apart the functor and its arguments and do the right thing…somehow. I smell assembler! I don't mind. I cut my teeth on it 28 years ago and still program PIC micros for people so I am not afraid of that or the dark!

I am already having delusions of grandeur and thinking about using RabbitMQ, Redis and MySQL and writing non-deterministic code that returns each row of a result set or keeps reading from an AMQP queue just because I can. For my day job, the ability to showcase Prolog would be great but it has to connect to all the usual stuff to be seen to be useful.

Ha. Welcome to the world of FFI! OK, 11:56 PM in the UK again, time for tubby bye byes.

:)
Cheers,
Sean.


--
Ce message a été vérifié par MailScanner pour des virus ou des polluriels et rien de suspect n'a été trouvé.

_______________________________________________
Users-prolog mailing list
address@hidden
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/users-prolog


--
Ce message a été vérifié par MailScanner pour des virus ou des polluriels et rien de suspect n'a été trouvé.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]