13 KiB
Gabeldorsche Architecture
[TOC]
This document outlines some architectural considerations we've made when developing the Gabeldorsche (GD) Bluetooth stack.
Threading model
First of all, the GD stack does not build on concepts of threads. Instead, it
works with Handlers
. However, since GD ultimately runs on an OS,
it still needs to interact with processes and threads before achieving the
Handler
abstraction.
Processes
In general. three types of processes exist in the GD runtime environment:
- Application processes
- include third-party apps, other system components such as audio and telecom
services that interact with the Bluetooth stack process APIs defined
through various RPC/IPC methods such as Binder, Socket IPC, gRPC, DBUS. and
so on, using languages such as AIDL or Protobuf. For Android applications,
although APIs are defined in AIDL, some boiler plate code is wrapped in Java
libraries exposed through code in
frameworks/base/core/java/android/bluetooth
that is released to developers as Android SDK. - Hardware abstraction layer (HAL) processes
- one or many processes from the vendor partition, and hence is hardware depenedent. They interact with the Bluetooth stack process via a set of hardware abstraction APIs defined through RPC/IPC methods such as Binder, Socket IPC, DBUS, and so on, using languages such as HIDL. On Android, this would be HAL processes that implement HIDL APIs such as IBluetoothHci and IBluetoothAudioProvider.
- Bluetooth stack process
- typically one single process that implements various Bluetooth protocols and profiles above the Host Controller Interface (HCI) and below the Bluetooth SDK APIs. On one hand, it servces the requests from Application processes; on the other hand, it forwards these requests via interactions with HAL processes. On Android, this process typically runs under AID_BLUETOOTH (usually 1002) with process name "com.android.bluetooth". The process is started in Java and loads native libraries through JNI. Other systems that do not use Java virtual machine may have a pure native process. Multiple threads may exist in this process for various reasons. The GD stack runs entirely in this process.
Threads in Bluetooth stack process
Currently, the goals of thread optimization in the Bluetooth stack are:
- Reduce the number of threads as much as possible to simplify synchronization
- Do blocking I/O operations in separate threads
- Try moving I/O operations into polling mode so that we can use event driven methods to interact with it on main thread
- Move alarm and timer mechanisms to their calling threads to avoid a separate alarm thread
- Isolate individual components so that each component can be started and stopped individually without terminating the main thread
- Prefer data passing over data sharing among threads to reduce locking and race conditions
After above optimization, we are left with five main types of threads within the native code:
- Main thread
- The main workhorse in the Bluetooth stack. The thread's execution context is
further divided into
Handlers
that reside in individualModules
. This thread can be divided further into smaller ones if performance is constrained on the running platform. Deployer just needs to bind handlers to different threads and that should not affect the overall operation. - JNI thread
- In the native thread, we treat the Java layer as a separate application as its threading module is completely different. Therefore, we put a thread between these two layers to buffer any blocking operation.
- HCI thread (or other HW I/O thread)
- This thread is responsible for deadling with hardware I/O and can be potentially blocking. Hence it has its separate thread to avoid blocking the main thread.
- Audio worker thread
- Responsible for audio encoding and decoding operations that require higher precision execution timing. Such worker has its separate thread to avoid being affected by the main thread.
- Socket I/O thread
- Communicate with various applications that uses the
BluetootSocket
interface. It has its sepearate thread due to potential I/O delay.
Data flow diagram
Function invocations between different components are abstracted as control
packets (function closure) passed through queues. Data flow between components
are data packets sent through queues, signaled using Reactor
. They
will merge to the input queue for each component. We define three types of
queues:
- Non-blocking queue
- When users try to dequeue when it’s empty, or enqueue when it’s full, it will return immediately. All queueing within a thread must be non-blocking, because otherwise it will deadlock.
- Blocking queue
- When users try to dequeue when it’s empty, or enqueue when it’s full, it will block, until other thread makes the queue to be writable/readable. It can be used as a flow control mechanism to avoid too many packets from user thread.
- Leaky queue
- Same as non-blocking queue, but it will flush when it’s full and user tries to enqueue. This is useful for audio encoding.
Building blocks
Module
Code in GD is packed into C++ objects called
Module
.
A module standardized the following aspects of GD code:
- Dependencies: A module provides its own dependencies on other modules by
implementing
ListDependencies()
- Life Cycle: A module must implement
Start()
andStop()
life cycle methods - Threading Module: The
Module
base class provides aHandler
for code execution context viaGetHandler()
- Metrics: A
Module
can dump its state information for dumpsys throughDumpState()
See its definition at: https://android.googlesource.com/platform/system/bt/+/master/gd/module.h
Handler
Similar to
android.os.Handler
,
bluetooth::os::Handler
provides a sequential execution context while hiding the concept of thread from
the executing code.
By scoping execution context into smaller areas, Handler
benefits development
in the following ways:
- Less need for locking due to sequential execution context
- Smaller context leads to easier management of code flow
- Separation from thread gives system deployer more freedom to tweak the
underlying thread allocation. For example, for real time OS without full
thread implementation, a
Handler
can be used to provide a near-thread execution context
Of course, there are downsides of using Handler
, which developers should be
cautious about:
WARNING: Although multiple Handler
could bind to the same thread, Handler
does not gurantee sequential execution of code across different Handler
even
when the are on the same thread.
WARNING: Locking among Handlers
that were bound to the same thread may result
in deadlock
WARNING: Data must be copied between Handler
to avoid both deadlock and race
condition
See its definition at: https://android.googlesource.com/platform/system/bt/+/master/gd/os/handler.h
Reactor
bluetooth::os:Reactor
implements the
Reactor Design Pattern, in
which concurrent Events are demultiplexed by a Synchronous Event
Demultiplexer to a list of Request Handlers registered through a
Dispatcher.
In a generic Linux operating system, such as Android, we implemented it using
file descriptors such as
eventfd for Handler
,
timerfd for
Alarm
, and socketfd for
data processing pipelines. In the context of file descriptors, events are
catigorized into two types:
- OnReadReady: means that the demultiplexer has some events for the
handler and the handler can read at least one event from the underlying
event queue. This is often associated with
EPOLLIN
,EPOLLHUP
,EPOLLRDHUP
, andEPOLLERR
. - OnWriteReady: means that the demultiplexer is ready to consume more
events from this handler, and the handler can write at least one event to
the underlying queue. this is often associated with
EPOLLOUT
.
This pattern naturally creates a back pressure from one queue to another without any extra signaling mechanism. When used in networking stack like ours, it simplifies the signaling code flow.
See its definition at: https://android.googlesource.com/platform/system/bt/+/master/gd/os/reactor.h
A pure data use case of Reactor
is a Reactive Queue
, see its definition at:
https://android.googlesource.com/platform/system/bt/+/master/gd/os/queue.h
Packet Definition Language (PDL)
Packet parsing and serialization has been a big part of any networking stack. It
is usually the first snippet of code that interface with a remote device. In the
past, this has been achieved manually using macros like STREAM_TO_UNIT8
or
UINT8_TO_STREAM
. This manual method is tedious and errorprone. To fix this, we
created a Packet Definition Language that defines networking packet structure to
the bits level. C++ headers and Python bindings will be automatically generated
from its code generator and any fixes to the code generator will apply
systematically to all packet code generated.
Example PDL:
// Comments
little_endian_packets // Whether this packet is big or small endian
// Include header from other C++ header files
custom_field SixBytes : 48 "packet/parser/test/" // expect six_bytes.h
custom_field Variable "packet/parser/test/" // expect variable.h
// A packet
packet Parent {
_fixed_ = 0x12 : 8, // fixed field 0x12 that takes 8 bits
_size_(_payload_) : 8, // Size field that takes 8 bits
_payload_, // special payload field of variable size
footer : 8, // fiexed size footer of 8 bits
}
packet Child : Parent {
field_name : 16, // addition field append after Parent
}
// an enum of 4 bits
enum FourBits : 4 {
ONE = 1,
TWO = 2,
THREE = 3,
FIVE = 5,
TEN = 10,
LAZY_ME = 15,
}
See its documentation at: https://android.googlesource.com/platform/system/bt/+/master/gd/packet/parser/README
Calling convention between modules
Asynchronous server-client model
For most communication among modules, developers should assume an asynchronous server-client model in a generic model like:
// Define callback function type
using CallbackFunction = std::function<void(ParamType)>;
// Asynchronous method definition
bool Foo(Parameter param, CallbackFunction callback);
// A new callback is passed for each asynchronous call
// Always prefer lambda over std::bind
CallbackFunction callback = [this] {
// do something
};
Parameter param = {
// something
};
if (Foo(param, callback)) {
// The callback will be invoked
// Callback must be invoked in the future
} else {
// Failed, no need to wait
}
Many protocols and profiles fit into such model such as AclManager
and
L2cap
.
Synchronous database model
In some cases, an asynchronous server-client model is not feasible. In this case, developers can consider a synchronous database model. In such a model, operations can happen synchronously with help of mutex. When the method returns, the changes must be reflected to all dependencies. Any changes in the internal states must be applied atomically.
// Synchronous method definition
void Foo(Parameter param, Output* output);
int Bar(Parameter param);
Parameter param = {
// something
};
Output output = {};
Foo(param, &output);
// output can be used immediately
int bar_output = Bar(param);
// bar_output can be used immediately
Many storage and informational modules fit into this model such as Metrics
and
Storage
.