From what experience I have programming whenever a program has a problem it crashes, whether it is from an unhanded exception or a piece of code that should have been checked for errors, but was not and threw one. What would cause a program to completely freeze a system to the point of requiring a restart.
Edit: Thanks for the answers. As for the language and OS this question was inspired by me playing Fallout and the game freezing twice in an hour causing me to have to restart the xbox, so I am guessing c++.
A million different things. The most common that come to mind are:
Spawning too many threads or processes, which drowns the OS scheduler.
Gobbling too much RAM, which puts the memory manager into page-fault hell.
In a Dotnet/Java type environment its quite difficult to seize a system up, because the Runtime keeps you code at a distance from the OS.
Closer to the metal say C or C++, Assembly etc you have to play fair with the rest of the system - If you dont have it already grab a copy of Petzold and observe/experiment yourself with the amount of 'boilerplate' code to get a single Window running...
Even closer, down at the driver level all sorts of things can happen...
There are number of reasons, being internal or external that leads to deadlocked application, more general case is when something is being asked for by a program but is not given that leads to infinite waiting, the practical example to this is, a program writes some text to a file, but when it is about to open a file for writing, same file is opened by any other application, so the requesting app will wait (freeze in some cases if not coded properly) until it gets exclusive control of the file.
And a critical freeze that leads to restarting the system is when the file which is asked for is something which very important for the OS. However, you may not need to restart the system in order to get it back to normal, unless the program which was frozen is written in a language that produces native binary, i.e. C/C++ to be precise. So if application is written in a language which works with the concept of managed code, like any .NET language, it will not need a system restart to get things back to normal.
page faults, trying to access inaccessible data or memory(acces violation), incompatible data types etc.
Related
My Labview Program works like a charm, until I look at the Block Diagram. No changes are made. I do not Save. Just Ctrl+E and then Ctrl+R.
Now it does not work properly. Only a Restart of Labview fixes the problem.
My Program controls two Scanner arrays for Laser Cutting simultaneously. To force parallel working, I use the Error handler and loops that wait for a signal from the Scanner. But suddenly some loops run more often than they should.
What does majorly happen in Labview when I open the Block diagram that messes with my code?
Edit:
Its hard to tell what is happening without violating my non-disclosure agreement.
I'm controlling two independent mirror-Arrays for Laser Cutting. While one is running one Cutting-Job, the other is supposed to run the other Jobs. Just very fast. When the first is finished they meet at the same position and run the same geometry at the same slow speed. The jobs are provided as *.XML and stored as .net Objects. The device only runs the most recent job and overwrites it when getting a new one.
I can check if a job is still running. While this is true I run a while loop for the other jobs. Now this loop runs a few times too often and even ignores WAIT-blocks to a degree. Also it skips the part where it reads the XML job file, changes the speed part back to fast again and saves it. It only runs one time fast.
#Joe: No it does not. It only runs once well. afterwards it does not.
Youtube links
The way it is supposed to move
The wrong way
There is exactly one thing I can think of that changes solely by opening the block diagram.
When the block diagram opens, any commented-out or unreachable-code-compiler-eliminated sections of code will load their subVIs. If one of those commented out sections of code were somehow interfere with your running code, you might have an issue.
There are only two ways I know of for that to interfere... both of them are fairly improbable.
a) You have some sort of "check for all VIs in memory" or "check for all types in memory" that you're using as a plug-in system. When the commented-out sections load, that would change the VIs in memory. Such systems are not uncommon when parsing XML, so maybe.
b) You are using Run VI method for some dynamically invoked VI to execute as a top-level VI, but by loading the diagram, it discovers that it is a subVI of your current program. A VI cannot simultaneously be top-level and a subVI, so the call to Run VI returns an error.
That's it. I can't think of anything else. Both ideas seem unlikely, but given your claim and a lack of a block diagram, I figured I'd post it as a hypothesis.
In the improbable case someone has a similar problem. The problem was a xml file that was read during run time. Sometimes multiple instances tried to access it and this produced the error.
Quick point to check: are Debug and "retain data in wires" disabled? While it may not change the computations, but it may certainly change the timing of very tight loops, and that was one of the unexpected program behaviors, OP was referring to.
I am evaluating different multiprocessing libraries for a fault tolerant application. I basically need any process to be allowed to crash without stopping the whole application.
I can do it using the fork() system call. The limit here is that the process can be created on the same machine, only.
Can I do the same with MPI? If a process created with MPI crashes, can the parent process keep running and eventually create a new process?
Is there any alternative (possibly multiplatform and open source) library to get the same result?
As reported here, MPI 4.0 will have support for fault tolerance.
If you want collectives, you're going to have to wait for MPI-3.something (as High Performance Mark and Hristo Illev suggest)
If you can live with point-to-point, and you are a patient person willing to raise a bunch of bug reports against your MPI implementation, you can try the following:
disable the default MPI error handler
carefully check every single return code from your MPI programs
keep track in your application which ranks are up and which are down. Oh, and when they go down they can never get back. but you're unable to use collectives anyway (see my opening statement), so that's not a huge deal, right?
Here's an old paper (back when Bill still worked at Argonne. I think it's from 2003):
http://www.mcs.anl.gov/~lusk/papers/fault-tolerance.pdf . It lays out the kinds of fault tolerant things one can do in MPI. Perhaps such a "constrained MPI" might still work for your needs.
If you're willing to go for something research quality, there's two implementations of a potential fault tolerance chapter for a future version of MPI (MPI-4?). The proposal is called User Level Failure Mitigation. There's an experimental version in MPICH 3.2a2 and a branch of Open MPI that also provides the interfaces. Both are far from production quality, but you're welcome to try them out. Just know that since this isn't in the MPI Standard, the function prefixes are not MPI_*. For MPICH, they're MPIX_*, for the Open MPI branch, they're OMPI_* (though I believe they'll be changing theirs to be MPIX_* soon as well.
As Rob Latham mentioned, there will be lots of work you'll need to do within your app to handle failures, though you don't necessarily have to check all of your return codes. You can/should use MPI error handlers as a callback function to simplify things. There's information/examples in the spec available along with the Open MPI branch.
Good news, my c64 ist still running after lots of years spending time on my attic..
But what I always wanted to know is:
How can I automatically load & run a program from a floppy disk that is already inserted
when I switch on the c64?
Some auto-running command like load "*",8,1 would be adequate...
Regards
MoC
You write that a command that you type in, like LOAD"*",8,1 would be adequate. Can I assume, then, that the only problem with that particular command is that it only loads, but doesn't automatically run, the program? If so, you have a number of solutions:
If it's a machine language program, then you should type LOAD"<FILENAME>",8,1: and then (without pressing <RETURN>) press <SHIFT>+<RUN/STOP>.
If it's a BASIC program, type LOAD"<FILENAME>",8: and then (without pressing <RETURN>) press <SHIFT>+<RUN/STOP>.
It is possible to write a BASIC program such that it automatically runs when you load it with LOAD"<FILENAME>",8,1. To do so, first add the following line to the beginning of your program:
0 POKE770,131:POKE771,164
Then issue the following commands to save the program:
PRINT"{CLR}":POKE770,113:POKE771,168:POKE43,0;POKE44,3:POKE157,0:SAVE"<FILENAME>",8
This is not possible without some custom cartridge.
One way to fix this would be getting the Retro Replay cartridge and hacking your own code for it.
I doubt there is a way to do it; you would need a cartridge which handles this case and I don't think one like that exists.
A better and more suitable solution is EasyFlash actually. Retro Replay is commonly used with its own ROM. Since it is a very useful cartridge by default ROM, I would never flash another ROM to it. Also it is more expensive than EasyFlash if you don't have any of those cartridges.
At the moment, I have Prince Of Persia (!) ROM written to my EasyFlash and when I open my c64, it autoruns just like you asked for.
Not 100% relevant, but C128 can autoboot disks in C128 mode. For example Ultima V (which has musics on C128 but not on C64 or C128 in C64 mode) autoboots.
As for cartridges, I'd recommend 1541 Ultimate 2. It can also run games from module rom images (although Prince of Persia doesn't work for me for some reason, perhaps software issue?), but you also get rather good floppy emulator (which also makes it easier to transfer stuff to real disks), REU, tape interface (if you order it) etc.
If you are working with a ML program, there are several methods. If you aren't worried about ever returning to normal READY prompt without a RESET, you can have a small loader that loads into the stack ($0100-$01FF) The loader would just load the next section of code, then jump to it. It would start at $0102 and needs to be as small as possible. Many times, the next piece to load is only 2 characters, so the file name can be placed at $0100 & $0101. Then all you need to do is set LFS, SETNAM, LOAD, then JMP to it. Fill the rest of the stack area with $01. It is also rather safe to only save $0100-$010d so that the entire program will fit on a single disk block.
One issue with this, is that it clears out past stack entries (so, your program will need to reset the stack pointer back to the top.) If your program tries to do a normal RTS out of itself, random things can occur. If you want to exit the program, you'll need to jmp to the reset vector ($FFFC by default,) to do so.
I'm new to VB6 but i'm currently in charge of maintaining a horror of editor like tool with plenty of forms, classes, modules and 3rd party tools all chunk together like the skin faces on that guy in the texas chainsaw massacre...
What i don't understand is why i get different results when i run the app in debugging mode, vs when i compiled it and run it on my devevelopment pc vs when i installed it on a different pc.
Yes i know i'm dumb, so please direct me to where i can find out more about this. I'm hoping to find out something like different linking, registry related etc connection that i'm simply not getting right now, i.e. something like wax on, wax off :P
The main pain in the neck is when i'm trying to debug some errors from my QA and i need to find a spare pc to test this on plus i can't directly debug because i don't know where the code is if i do it that manner.
Thanks.
i run the app in debugging mode vs when i compiled it and run it on my
devevelopment pc
When you compile you have the option of compiling to native code or pcode. The debugger runs using pcode only. Under rare circumstances when you compile to native code there will be a change in behavior. This particular is really rare. I used VB6 since it's release and I may get it once or twice a year. My application is a complex CAD/CAM creating shapes and running metal cutting machine and has two dozen DLLs. Not a typical situation. At home with my hobby software I never ran into this problem.
There are another class of errors that result from event sequencing problems. While VB6 isn't truly multi-tasking it has the ability to jump out of the current code block to process a event. If it re-enters the same block for the new event interesting things (to say the least) can result. I think this is the likely source of your problems as you software is an editor which is a highly interactive type of software.
In general the problem is fixed by reordering the effected areas. You find the effected area by inserting MsgBox or write to a text file to log where you are. I recommend logging to a text file as MsgBox tend to alter behavior that are timing or multi-tasking related.
Remember if a event fire while VB6 in the middle of a code block and there a DoEvents floating around then it will leave the code block process the event and return to the original code block. If it re-enters the same code block and you didn't mean for this to happen then you will have problems. And you will have different problems on different computers as the timing will be different for each.
The easiest way to deal with this type of issues is create some flag variables. In multi-tasking parlance they are known as semaphores or mutexes. WHen you enter a critical section of code, you set it true. When you leave the routine you set it to false. If it is already true when you enter that section of code you don't execute it.
when i installed it on a different pc.
These are usually the result of the wrong DLL installed. Most likely you have an older version while the target has a newer version. I would download the free Virtual PC and create a clean Window XP install to double check this.
If your problem is event timing this too can be different on different computers. This is found by logging (not MsgBox) suspect regions.
If you can display a screen shot or the text of your specific errors then I can help better.
The first thing to check would be the versions of all the dlls that your app depends on - including the service pack version of the VB6 dll.
Have you any more specific details about what's behaving differently?
Whether this is possible I don't know, but it would mighty useful!
I have a process that fails periodically (running in Windows 2000). I then have just one chance to react to it before having to restart it and painfully wait for it to fail again. I didn't write the process so don't have the source to debug. The failure is seemingly random.
With a snapshot of the process I could repeatedly and quickly test reactions to the failure.
I had thought of running inside a VM but this isn't possible in this instance.
EDIT:
#Jon Cage asked:
When you say a snapshot, you mean capturing a process when it's about to fail (including memory, program state etc. etc.) ...and then replaying it's final few seconds repeatedly to see what effect it has on some other component?
This is exactly what I mean!
I think minidump is what you are looking for.
You can also used Userdump:
The User Mode Process Dumper
(userdump) dumps any running Win32
processes memory image (including
system processes such as csrss.exe,
winlogon.exe, services.exe, etc) on
the fly, without attaching a debugger,
or terminating target processes.
Generated dump file can be analyzed or
debugged by using the standard
debugging tools.
This article shows you how to use it.
My best bet is to start the process in a debugger (OllyDbg being my preferred tool).
The process will pause on an exception, and you can try to figure out what happened shortly before that.
This needs some understanding of assembler and does not allow to create a snapshot of the process for later analysis. You would need to write your own debugger for that - it should be theoretically possible.