Rss Feed
Tweeter button
Facebook button
Technorati button
Reddit button
Myspace button
Linkedin button
Webonews button
Delicious button
Digg button
Stumbleupon button
Newsvine button
Software Verification logo

The future of development environments is bubble shaped

March 17th, 2010

Researchers at Brown University have created a new way of interacting with source code and debuggers with their innovative Code Bubble based IDE.

The link includes a video (8 minutes, worth watching the whole thing) and a written description of what they hope to acheive. If you are really keen, you can participate in the beta.

Its an interesting look into the future. I think we’ll see some of these ideas sooner than Visual Studio 2035 though :-)

What will Visual Studio 2035 be able to do?

March 17th, 2010

Will Visual Studio 2035 exist? Will we design and write software the same way in the future?

Read Bruce Eckel’s thought provoking article about “Programming in the mid future”.

What is the difference between a page and a paragraph?

March 8th, 2010

In the real world we all know that pages contain paragraphs and that paragraphs are full of sentences created from words.

In the world of Microsoft Windows Operating Systems it is somewhat different – paragraphs contain pages!

In this article I’m to going to explain what a page is and what a paragraph is and how they relate to each other and why this information can be useful helping to identify and resolve certain memory related bugs.

Virtual Memory Pages
A virtual memory page is the smallest unit of memory that can be mapped by the CPU. In the case of 32 bit x86 processors such as the Intel Pentium and AMD Athlon, a page is 4Kb. When you make a call to VirtualProtect() or VirtualQuery() you will be setting or querying the memory protection for sizes that are multiples of a page.

The size of a page may vary from CPU type to CPU type. For example a 64 bit x86 CPU will have a page size of 8Kb.

You can determine the size of a page by calling GetSystemInfo() and reading the SYSTEM_INFO.dwPageSize value.

Virtual Memory Paragraphs
A virtual memory paragraph is the minimum amount of memory that can be commited/reserved using the VirtualAlloc() call. On 32 bit x86 CPUs this value is 64Kb (0×00010000). If you have ever used the debugger and looked at the load addresses of DLLs in the Modules list you may have noticed that DLLs always load on 64Kb boundaries. This is the reason – the area a DLL is loaded into is initialised by a call to VirtualAlloc to reserve the memory prior to the DLL being loaded.

Loaded Modules

You can determine the size of a paragraph by calling GetSystemInfo() and reading the SYSTEM_INFO.dwAllocationGranularity value.

Given these values, you can see that (on 32 bit 86 systems) a virtual memory paragraph is composed of 16 virtual memory pages.

How can I use this information?
If you are using VirtualAlloc() it is important to know the granularity at which the allocations will be returned. This is the size of a paragraph. This information is fundamental in deciding how you would implement a custom heap. You know there are fixed boundaries at which your data can exist. You can enumerate the list of possible paragraph locations very quickly (there are 32,768 possible locations in a 2GB space, as opposed to 2 billion locations if the paragraph could start anywhere).

Custom heaps
If you are writing a custom heap, a key indicator to keep track of is memory fragmentation and memory utilisation. Knowing your paragraph and page sizes you can inspect how each page and each paragraph of memory are used by the application and the custom heap to determine if there is wastage, what wastage there is and what form the wastage takes. This information could lead you to modify your heap algorithm to use pages differently to reduce fragmentation. See Delete memory 5 times faster for one simple technique, using HeapAlloc, the same principles apply here.

Loading large data files
Another use for this information is finding out why a certain large file will not load into memory despite Task Manager saying that you have 2GB of free memory. It is not uncommon to find a forum posting somewhere from someone that has a large image file (a satellite phote, MRI scan, etc) that is about 1GB in size. They wish to load it into memory, do in-memory processing on it, save the results, discard the memory then repeat the process, often for numerous images.
Typically on the third attempt to load a large file, the file will not load and the forum poster is left very confused.

The typical implementation is to allocate space for the large file using a call such as malloc() or operator new(). Both of which use the C runtime heap to allocate the memory.

The principle seems fine, but the problem is caused by memory fragmentation which results in a less accessible, totally usable, free space because the remaining free space blocks are separated into a many smaller regions, most of which are smaller than any forthcoming large allocation required by the application. Without the information about where pages and paragraphs are situated, how big they are and what their status is, identifying the cause of this failure could be very time consuming. Once you know the cause, you can think about allocating and managing your memory differently and prevent the bug from happening in the first place.

For situations like these, using HeapAlloc() with a dedicate heap (created using HeapCreate()) or even just directly using VirtualAlloc() will most likely lead to superior results than using the C runtime heap.

Tools
A first step in understanding such bugs is to be able to visualize the memory and to also inspect the various page and paragraph information.

To aid in these tasks we have just added a VM Pages view and VM Paragraphs view to VM Validator to make identifying such issues easier. VM Validator is a free download.

Memory Validator will also be updated with a VM Paragraphs view in the next release (Memory Validator already has a more detailed VM Pages view).

Thank you to Blake Miller of Invensys for suggesting an alternative wording for one paragraph of this article.

Delete memory 5 times faster

March 2nd, 2010

Memory management in C and C++ is typically done using either the malloc/realloc/free C runtime functions or the C++ operators new and delete. Typically the C++ operators call down to the underlying malloc/free implementation to do the actual memory allocations.

This is great, its useful, it works, BUT it puts all the allocations in the same heap. So when you come around to deallocating the heap manager will need to take into account all the other objects and allocations that are also in the heap but unrelated to the data you are deallocating. That adds overhead to the heap manager, causing memory fragmentation and slower heap management.

There is a different way you can handle this situation – you can use your own heap for a given group of allocations.

	HANDLE	hHeap;

	hHeap = HeapCreate(0, 0x00010000, 0); // 64K growable heap

The downside to this is that you have to remember to use the correct allocators and deallocators for these objects and not to use malloc/free etc. You can mitigate this in C++ by overriding new/delete to use your own heap.

void *myClass::operator new(size_t size)
{
	return HeapAlloc(hHeap, 0, size);
}

void myClass::operator delete(void *ptr)
{
	HeapFree(hHeap, 0, ptr);
}

The upside to this technique is that you can delete all your deallocations in one call by deleting the heap and not bothering with deleting individual allocations. This is also about 5 times faster.

Old style:

	for(i = 0; i < count; i++)
	{
		HeapFree(hHeap, 0, ptrs[i]);
	}

New style:

	HeapDestroy(hHeap);
	hHeap = NULL;

There is another benefit to this technique: By deleting the heap and then re-creating a heap for new allocations you remove all fragmentation from the heap and start the new heap with 0% fragmentation.

HeapDestroy timing demonstration

Download the source of the demonstration application. Project and solution files for Visual Studio 6.0 and Visual Studio 2008 are provided.

We use this technique for some of our tools where we want a high performance heap and zero fragmentation.

You will also want to ensure that whatever software tool you are using to monitor memory allocations will mark all entries in a heap that is destroyed as deallocated.

Speed up your MFC program without a profiler!

February 13th, 2010

I’m going to explain how to potentially improve the performance of MFC programs using CMap<> and related containers (CMapStringToPtr, etc) by a substantial amount.

We use MFC for quite a lot of our software. We also use STL and also some custom containers. It is easy to fall into certain programming habits of using a particular container for a particular task. Sometimes the result is not what you expected!

During the Christmas break I decided to write some software to analyse the Software Verification website log files. Initially I wanted to do keyword mining, but it soon blossomed into a stats package calculating different statistics for keywords, referrers, domains, URLs, favourite domains, bounce rates, evaluation download rates, etc.

I was also reading the wonderful "Web Analytics an Hour a Day" book by Avinash Kauschik. And to top it all, I was ill. I’ve since been told by various people that I had Swine Flu.

The initial version didn’t calculate much and was quite fast, but when I wanted to scale up to calculating monthly data as well as yearly, that was 13 times as much calculation and the inefficiencies in container choice started to show. I’d been lazy, this was a hobby project, nothing serious, so I’d chosen the MFC class CMap.

I wanted to map keyword strings to countData objects which would hold all the data on that keyword. Later we could discard the map and just use an array of keyword objects for random access and sorting.  I wanted data for unique keywords, so during processing of the data it seemed natural to want to map the keyword to the keyword data. I was doing similar things for referrers, referring domains, requested URLs, etc.

A CMap<> is an MFC hash table. A declaration would look like this:

CMap<CString, LPCTSTR, countData *, countData *&> mfcData;

The data processing would be something like this (simplified)

	BOOL	b;

	while(TRUE)
	{
		CString	s;

		b = file.ReadString(s);
		if (!b)
			break;

		// lookup string

		countData	*cd = NULL;

		if (mfcData.Lookup(s, cd))
		{
			// if we know about the string update the count

			cd->addCount(1);
		}
		else
		{
			// otherwise create the string and update the count

			cd = new countData(s, 1);
			mfcData.SetAt(s, cd);
		}
	}

The problem with the CMap<> class is that its hash key calculation isn’t very sophisticated, so you get collisions reasonably quickly, which forces the CMap to start making linked lists for the non-identical collisions, and walking the linked lists for subsequent searches is linear time. That gets slower as you add more data.

After processing for one particlularly large set of data for 2009 took 36 hours I thought a better solution was required. Why did I let it run so long? Partly because once it got past a few hours I was curious to see how long it would take. By this time I was ill, so it didn’t really matter, I was spending much of this time in bed alternately too hot or too cold :-(

The STL has a non-standard hash table, so we didn’t want to use that, so we opted to use the STL <map> class. The declaration would look like this

map<CString, countData *> stlData;

The data processing would be something like this (simplified)

	BOOL	b;

	while(TRUE)
	{
		if (stopScan)
			break;

		CString	s;

		b = file.ReadString(s);
		if (!b)
			break;

		// lookup string

		MAP_STL::iterator	iter;

		iter = stlData.find(s);
		if (iter != stlData.end())
		{
			// if we know about the string update the count

			iter->second->addCount(1);
		}
		else
		{
			// otherwise create the string and update the count

			countData	*cd;

			cd = new countData(s, 1);
			stlData[s] = cd;
		}
	}

This is not a hash table, its a B-tree, so it will use more memory than the hash map, and unique entries should be slower than the hash table, but colliding entries should be faster. With this new style of map substituted all over the program, for all the many unique datatypes being calculated, the processing time dropped from 36 hours to 1 hour.

In other words, the STL version processed the data in 2.77% of the time the MFC version processed the data. That is a 97% improvement in processing time.

I am not saying that you will get this improvement. This improvement was acheived partly because of the type of statistics being calculated and partly due to the input data having so many collisions. The dataset for the above test was 17.1GB of Apache log files.

I have created an example MFC program that shows a trivial example of reading in lines from a file, testing them for uniqueness and storing them and updating the counts for them. The program also does the same using STL. Some sample times shown below:

Size (MB) MFC STL Improvement
34 00:00:12 00:00:06 50%
2048 00:22:46 00:05:21 76%

Time comparison of reading a 34MB file with MFC and STL
For a sample 34MB input file, the MFC program processes the data in 12+ seconds and the STL program processes the same data in 6+ seconds. An approximately 50% improvement.

Time comparison of reading a 2GB file with MFC and STL
For a sample 2GB input file, the MFC program processes the data in 22 minutes 46 seconds seconds and the STL program processes the same data in 5 minutes 21 seconds. An approximately 76% improvement.

The larger the dataset, or the more different CMap<> you are using calculating the data, the chances are that changing them to STL <map> would be highly effective in speeding up that part of your application. Note that if you are only loading a few tens of items into the map, it will not be worth making the change.

You can download the executable and the source code with project files so that you can test this yourself.

I don’t recommend changing all occurrences of CMap<> for STL <map>, but changing a the right ones should make some easy and worthwhile gains for you.

Code signing and user hinting

December 22nd, 2009

We have just released new versions of our software tools that are code signed.

This change will please those of you that are using more recent operating systems that will ask your permission to start an executable that is not signed by a company that you trust. No more warnings for Vista and Windows 7 users!

We have also introduced a new user hinting feature that provides some general guidance on what to do next using unused space on the user interface. This user hinting came about as a result of some usability testing we did during November. We hope you find this useful, if not for yourself, but your colleagues when introduced to the software.

Support for MinGW and QtCreator

December 4th, 2009

Everyone uses Visual Studio to write C and C++ software don’t they? Yes! you all chorus. Apart from some guys at the back who like to use gcc and g++. They use MinGW when working on Windows. And they may even use Emacs, or perish the thought, vi!

Up until now we haven’t been able to cater to the needs of gcc and g++ users. We’d get email every month asking when we were going to support MinGW or if we supported QtCreator. It was frustrating admitting we couldn’t support that environment. Even more so as the founders of Software Verification wrote large GIS applications using gcc and g++ back in the early 1990s.

During October we integrated support for MinGW and QtCreator into Coverage Validator, Memory Validator, Performance Validator and Thread Validator. Both COFF and STABS debug formats are supported, which provides some flexibility in how you choose to handle your symbols.

We’ll continue to add support for additional compilers to our tools as long as there is interest from you, the kind people that use our software tools.

Got a crash with a strange pointer value?

December 4th, 2009

Ever had a crash with a pointer value of 0xcdcdcdcd or 0xdddddddd or 0xfeeefeee?

You have? Sooner or later when you work with C or C++ you’ll bump into one of these crashes. You will no doubt try to reproduce the crash and thats when you’ll probably notice this unusual value has repeated itself. Perhaps the value is significant, perhaps it is telling you something?

Stephen has just written an article about the unusual bit patterns you can find in variables on the stack or in the various Win32 heaps or in the CRT heap. The article closes with some suggestions on how to prevent these errors from occurring.

A few minutes spent reading about the bit patterns may help you see these bit patterns less frequently and dig you out of any 0xfeeefeee hole you may have fallen into.

What do programmers want for Christmas?

November 25th, 2008

T-shirts appears to be the answer. Even better if they come with a natty logo or slogan.

Andy Brice has come up with a wonderful idea of creating some interesting T shirt designs with programming related in-jokes. The profits from the sale of these T-shirts goes to two worthy charities: SightSavers and JairpurFoot. SightSavers is a charity helping to prevent blindness and eyesight problems and Jaipurfoot is a charity helping to provide low cost prosthetics to people in 22 countries.

Head on over to T-Shirts for Programmers to read about Andy’s motivations for the T-shirts. His blog also has lots of interesting articles about the independent software business.

Full disclosure: Andy Brice is a customer of ours. Andy uses Coverage Validator to improve the testing of his popular Table Planning software. Andy has recently written a review of Coverage Validator V3.

Robot footballers in China

August 8th, 2008

A while ago a German University Robot Football team asked us if we could help them with their software. We provided Performance Validator to them to see what they could do. Today we found out.

The Darmstadt Dribblers have just taken their robot Isra to RoboCup 2008, held in Suzhou, China. They came 4th in the championship (24 teams competing), losing to the championship winners (also from Germany). The other two quarter finalists were both from Japan. Thats a good result, against some good competition.

Isra running to the ball.

Isra running and kicking

Isra tackles an opponent.

Isra tackles

Isra scores a goal.

Isra scores a goal

This YouTube video shows Isra in action at Suzhou:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QTbGXqQNkqQ&feature=PlayList&p=28F7B3DCA3198715&index=7

The Dramstadt Dribblers have uploaded various videos here:
http://www.youtube.com/profile_videos?user=DarmstadtDribblers

Still think software engineering can’t be fun?

We’ll be reporting on the Dribblers’ performance as they enter more competitions.


Perfect imprecision, thoughts on memory leaks, performance profiling, code coverage, deadlock detection and flow tracing is proudly powered by WordPress
Entries (RSS) and Comments (RSS).

About Us | Site Map | Legal | Contact Us | ©2002-2006: Software Verification Ltd : all rights reserved: registered in England No. 3939098 112
Design by ITS GUI