Skip to content
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

n-api: Re-use napi_env between modules #14217

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

gabrielschulhof
Copy link
Contributor

Create a std::map keyed on the isolate pointer and storing one napi_env
per isolate and protect it with a mutex.

Re: #13872 (comment)

Checklist
  • make -j4 test (UNIX), or vcbuild test (Windows) passes
  • tests and/or benchmarks are included
  • commit message follows commit guidelines
Affected core subsystem(s)

n-api

@bnoordhuis @mhdawson this is what sharing the napi_env would look like with a global static and a mutex.

@nodejs-github-bot nodejs-github-bot added c++ Issues and PRs that require attention from people who are familiar with C++. node-api Issues and PRs related to the Node-API. labels Jul 13, 2017
src/node_api.cc Outdated
@@ -705,6 +706,27 @@ bool FindWrapper(v8::Local<v8::Object> obj,
return true;
}

std::map<v8::Isolate*, napi_env> napi_env_map;
uv_once_t napi_env_once = UV_ONCE_INIT;
uv_mutex_t napi_env_mutex;
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

node::Mutex (and use node::Mutex::ScopedLock below), then you won't need a uv_once_t either.

src/node_api.cc Outdated
uv_mutex_lock(&napi_env_mutex);
result = napi_env_map[isolate];
if (result == nullptr) {
result = napi_env_map[isolate] = new napi_env__(isolate);
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Are napi_env instances immortal? If not, there should be code somewhere to remove it from the map again.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I guess we need a refcount then, because we need to know, for each isolate, how many modules are using the napi_env.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

We shall also need a v8impl::release_env() to dereference/delete. However, these only makes sense when we have a module unload strategy.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I have changed the comment about v8impl::get_env() to remind of this.

NAPI_CALL(env, napi_get_cb_info(env, info, &argc, &external, NULL, NULL));
NAPI_CALL(env, napi_get_value_external(env, external, &external_data));
NAPI_CALL(env,
napi_get_boolean(env, ((napi_env)external_data) == env, &return_value));
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Style nit: can you line up the arguments in this file and others?

src/node_api.cc Outdated
@@ -718,7 +740,7 @@ void napi_module_register_cb(v8::Local<v8::Object> exports,

// Create a new napi_env for this module. Once module unloading is supported
// we shall have to call delete on this object from there.
napi_env env = new napi_env__(context->GetIsolate());
napi_env env = v8impl::get_env(context->GetIsolate());
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The comment should probably change now as we'd no longer delete the env when a module is unloaded.

@mhdawson
Copy link
Member

Can you change the title for the commit comment so that Re-use is lower case -> re-use

@jasongin
Copy link
Member

I think this isn't going to work when modules static-link node_api.cc from node-addon-api to target node versions without N-API built-in. In that case each module would have a separate napi_env_map instance.

@gabrielschulhof
Copy link
Contributor Author

@jasongin perhaps then we need a public API for per-isolate data that is better than what V8 offers.

@gabrielschulhof gabrielschulhof force-pushed the shared_env branch 2 times, most recently from 248260d to 6a58919 Compare July 19, 2017 13:12
@gabrielschulhof
Copy link
Contributor Author

@bnoordhuis @mhdawson I have now addressed your review comments.

I'm not sure I should be implementing the napi_env refcounting until we actually have a solution for unloading modules.

As for the interoperability with statically linked node-addon-api versions mentioned by @jasongin, I think we've already broken that with the stricter wrapping, because we perform the type check based on the value of the string pointer, not its contents.

@jasongin
Copy link
Member

I think we've already broken that with the stricter wrapping, because we perform the type check based on the value of the string pointer, not its contents.

I think that is not actually a problem, because there should never be a need for a module to unwrap an instance that was wrapped by a different module.

@gabrielschulhof
Copy link
Contributor Author

@TimothyGu's idea about using v8::Private to attach private properties to objects gave me the idea that we can place the napi_env in an External and attach it to the global object using such a v8::Private hidden property. That would obviate the need for a solution such as the one in this PR, and it would solve the problem of modules loaded via various incarnations of node-addon-api.

TBH, if we could attach such hidden properties to the global object we'd essentially have the per-isolatecontext storage mechanism we need.

In terms of implementation, from https://github.com/nodejs/nan/blob/master/nan_private.h it looks like v8::Private is available in node 8 and node 6 but not node 4. So, for node-addon-api we'd have to #ifdef the way nan #ifdefs to cover both cases. This means that the contents of node_api.cc would irrevocably diverge between node and node-addon-api.

RFC @bnoordhuis @mhdawson @jasongin

@gabrielschulhof
Copy link
Contributor Author

@jasongin I wouldn't dismiss the idea of cross-module wrapping/unwrapping so easily. I can imagine a scenario where we have two different packages depending on the same N-API module and the application passing objects originating from one to the other and vice versa.

@gabrielschulhof
Copy link
Contributor Author

@mhdawson @bnoordhuis @jasongin I re-wrote this patch using @TimothyGu's idea regarding v8::Private. This seems to be a much better solution. It's cleaner, it does not use a mutex, and it'll work across both built-in and external versions of N-API, provided the external version is ABI-compatible with the internal version - that is, we keep node_api.cc well in sync in order to make sure that the contents of an instance of napi_env is the same both externally and internally.

@gabrielschulhof
Copy link
Contributor Author

Oh, and it takes care of the eventuality of module unloading, and the eventuality of a module having to be loaded multiple times for multiple contexts as foretold by @bnoordhuis.

src/node_api.cc Outdated
auto maybe_key = v8::String::NewFromUtf8(isolate, "N-API Environment",
v8::NewStringType::kInternalized);
CHECK(!maybe_key.IsEmpty());
auto key = v8::Private::ForApi(isolate, maybe_key.ToLocalChecked());
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

You should try to cache the key somehow to avoid having to create a new string and getting it from the V8 internal hash map on every run. GC is a non-concern as v8::Privates created through ForApi will never be GC'd.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

That's a bit of a chicken-and-egg problem. I mean, I could create a std::map keyed on the isolate and store these v8::Privates but then I might as well go with the previous approach of storing the napi_env in the map's value.

This code runs once as part of DLopen() for a given module and then never again for that module. Given this, is it worth caching this value?

Copy link
Contributor Author

@gabrielschulhof gabrielschulhof Jul 21, 2017

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Actually, storing the napi_env instead of the v8::Private means I lose the ability to pass a napi_env created internally to node-addon-api, so I wouldn't revert to the previous approach. Still, I would only introduce a mutex if caching it really is worth it for the load-module use case.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

If module loading performance isn't a concern, I wouldn't worry about it. FWIW it's also not necessary to use a mutex as ForApi is idempotent.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I thought the point of caching the v8::Private was to avoid calling ForApi more than once per new isolate. Or did you mean that I should cache the result of v8::String::NewFromOneByte?

If I use a std::map I must protect it with a mutex because another thread might be in the process of depositing a new value or it might be in the process of erasing an unused value.

I suppose you mean the kind of caching that I see in node.cc, like env->exports_string(). I guess maybe I should start looking into using node::Environment.

src/node_api.cc Outdated
auto isolate = context->GetIsolate();
auto global = context->Global();

auto maybe_key = v8::String::NewFromUtf8(isolate, "N-API Environment",
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

NewFromOneByte would suffice.

src/node_api.cc Outdated
auto external = v8::External::New(isolate, result);
auto maybe_set = global->SetPrivate(context, key, external);
CHECK(maybe_set.IsJust());
CHECK(maybe_set.FromJust());
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

These two checks can be combined as CHECK(maybe_set.FromJust(false)).

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

AFAICT FromJust() doesn't take any parameters. I tried to combine, but I get

In file included from ../src/node_internals.h:28:0,
                 from ../src/node.h:173,
                 from ../src/node_buffer.h:25,
                 from ../src/node_api.cc:11:
../src/node_api.cc: In function ‘napi_env__* {anonymous}::v8impl::get_env(v8::Local<v8::Context>)’:
../src/node_api.cc:735:35: error: no matching function for call to ‘v8::Maybe<bool>::FromJust(bool)’
     CHECK(maybe_set.FromJust(false));
                                   ^
../src/util.h:107:44: note: in definition of macro ‘UNLIKELY’
 #define UNLIKELY(expr) __builtin_expect(!!(expr), 0)
                                            ^~~~
../src/node_api.cc:735:5: note: in expansion of macro ‘CHECK’
     CHECK(maybe_set.FromJust(false));
     ^~~~~
In file included from ../src/node.h:63:0,
                 from ../src/node_buffer.h:25,
                 from ../src/node_api.cc:11:
../deps/v8/include/v8.h:8014:15: note: candidate: T v8::Maybe<T>::FromJust() const [with T = bool]
   V8_INLINE T FromJust() const {
               ^~~~~~~~
../deps/v8/include/v8.h:8014:15: note:   candidate expects 0 arguments, 1 provided

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Oops I meant FromMaybe(false)

@gabrielschulhof gabrielschulhof force-pushed the shared_env branch 3 times, most recently from c775e90 to 9ff9cf7 Compare July 21, 2017 14:04
Copy link
Member

@TimothyGu TimothyGu left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM. Don't worry about the Private thing, not sure what I was thinking.

src/node_api.cc Outdated
delete data.GetParameter();
}

napi_env get_env(v8::Local<v8::Context> context) {
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

All other functions in the v8impl namespace uses CamelCase. Might be good to do that here etc.

'use strict';

const common = require('../../common');
const store_env = require(`./build/${common.buildType}/store_env`);
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

camelCase in JS

Copy link
Member

@bnoordhuis bnoordhuis left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM modulo style nits.

src/node_api.cc Outdated
auto global = context->Global();

auto maybe_key = v8::String::NewFromOneByte(isolate,
reinterpret_cast<const uint8_t *>("N-API Environment"),
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Nit: no space before *

src/node_api.cc Outdated

auto maybe_value = global->GetPrivate(context, key);
CHECK(!maybe_value.IsEmpty());
auto value = maybe_value.ToLocalChecked();
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Just an observation but .ToLocalChecked() also does the equivalent of CHECK(!maybe_value.IsEmpty()).

src/node_api.cc Outdated
auto external = v8::External::New(isolate, result);
auto maybe_set = global->SetPrivate(context, key, external);
CHECK(maybe_set.FromMaybe(false));
v8::Persistent<v8::External> persistent(isolate, external);
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This works because ~Persistent() currently doesn't call .Reset() but v8.h indicates that may change in the future. Not sure what to do about that but I figured you should know.


NAPI_CALL(env, napi_get_cb_info(env, info, &argc, &external, NULL, NULL));
NAPI_CALL(env, napi_get_value_external(env, external, &data));
NAPI_CALL(env, napi_get_boolean(env, ((napi_env)data) == env, &return_value));
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

static_cast?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is C.

@gabrielschulhof
Copy link
Contributor Author

@TimothyGu I have updated to camelCase.

@bnoordhuis I have removed the Persistent and replaced it with one of our self-destructing v8impl::Reference objects.

Store the `napi_env` on the global object at a private key. This gives
us one `napi_env` per context.

Re: nodejs#13872 (comment)
@gabrielschulhof
Copy link
Contributor Author

gabrielschulhof commented Jul 22, 2017

I changed the commit message subject to contain no uppercase letters.

@gabrielschulhof
Copy link
Contributor Author

If this is good to go, may I have a CI run please?

@TimothyGu
Copy link
Member

Seems like the CI is having some issues, though.

@gabrielschulhof
Copy link
Contributor Author

I think the CI is fixed now. Could somebody please submit this PR?

@gabrielschulhof
Copy link
Contributor Author

Oh, NM. Thanks!

@gabrielschulhof
Copy link
Contributor Author

https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-pull-request/9351/ completed successfully a while ago. It shouldn't still show as pending in this PR.

@addaleax
Copy link
Member

@gabrielschulhof CI status reporting is broken, don’t worry about it (not sure whether somebody’s looking into it or not).

@gabrielschulhof
Copy link
Contributor Author

@addaleax NP. I'm just eager to get this landed, that's all :)

@addaleax
Copy link
Member

I’m going to sleep soon but if it’s not landed tomorrow I can do that.

Also, just nominated you for push & CI access, that should be a bit more practical if you like :)

@gabrielschulhof
Copy link
Contributor Author

Wow! I'm honoured! Thanks!

@TimothyGu
Copy link
Member

Landed in 9926dfe.

I also amended the commit message to reference #14367 rather than #13872 (comment), as the approach we ended up taking was documented in #14367.

@TimothyGu TimothyGu closed this Jul 26, 2017
TimothyGu pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jul 26, 2017
Store the `napi_env` on the global object at a private key. This gives
us one `napi_env` per context.

Refs: #14367
PR-URL: #14217
Reviewed-By: Ben Noordhuis <info@bnoordhuis.nl>
Reviewed-By: Timothy Gu <timothygu99@gmail.com>
@TimothyGu
Copy link
Member

And also, I'd second Anna's nomination :)

@gabrielschulhof gabrielschulhof deleted the shared_env branch July 27, 2017 00:08
addaleax pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jul 27, 2017
Store the `napi_env` on the global object at a private key. This gives
us one `napi_env` per context.

Refs: #14367
PR-URL: #14217
Reviewed-By: Ben Noordhuis <info@bnoordhuis.nl>
Reviewed-By: Timothy Gu <timothygu99@gmail.com>
@addaleax addaleax mentioned this pull request Aug 2, 2017
gabrielschulhof pushed a commit to gabrielschulhof/node that referenced this pull request Apr 10, 2018
Store the `napi_env` on the global object at a private key. This gives
us one `napi_env` per context.

Refs: nodejs#14367
PR-URL: nodejs#14217
Reviewed-By: Ben Noordhuis <info@bnoordhuis.nl>
Reviewed-By: Timothy Gu <timothygu99@gmail.com>
MylesBorins pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Apr 16, 2018
Store the `napi_env` on the global object at a private key. This gives
us one `napi_env` per context.

Refs: #14367
Backport-PR-URL: #19447
PR-URL: #14217
Reviewed-By: Ben Noordhuis <info@bnoordhuis.nl>
Reviewed-By: Timothy Gu <timothygu99@gmail.com>
@MylesBorins MylesBorins mentioned this pull request Apr 16, 2018
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
c++ Issues and PRs that require attention from people who are familiar with C++. node-api Issues and PRs related to the Node-API.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

8 participants