Archive for May, 2009

Buildings plugins as Haskell shared libs

Thursday, May 21st, 2009

This post is a sneak preview about building Haskell shared libraries on Linux. We’ll look at how to use ghc to make a standalone Haskell shared library that exports C functions. We could use this shared library as part of a bigger project (without having to use ghc for the final linking) or we could load it dynamically, e.g. as a plugin in some other program.

This work is being supported by the IHG and it builds on the hard work of several other people over the last few years (see the first post in this series for the history and credits)

Building GHC with shared libs support

For starters you need the latest development version of GHC. See these instructions on getting the sources and doing the configure, build and install steps.

The only non-standard thing you need to do is to use ./configure --enable-shared. Note that this has only been tested on Linux x86-64 and x86, though in the past, the shared lib support has also worked on Linux PPC and OSX PPC.

Currently what you get is a ghc that itself is statically linked but it can build programs and shared libraries that dynamically link against the runtime system and base libraries.

Building programs that use shared libs

For example, for “hello world”:

$ ghc --make -dynamic Hello.hs

It is interesting to look at the output of the ldd program:

$ ldd ./Hello

I’ll not paste the whole output, but here’s a bit of it:

libHSbase-4.0.0.0-ghc6.11.so =>
  /opt/ghc/lib/ghc-6.11/base-4.0.0.0/libHSbase-4.0.0.0-ghc6.11.so
  (0x00007f8959aff000)

(I’ve simplified the ghc version slightly)

If you were to look at the full output what you would notice is that it links against each Haskell package as a separate .so file. What is more, it is able to find the shared libs even though they are not in a standard location like /usr/local/lib. This is because by default it is using the -rpath mechanism. It is also possible to build binaries in a mode that does not embed an rpath which might be more suitable for deployment.

Building shared libs

Suppose we have a module Foo.hs that uses the FFI to export a C function called foo():

module Foo where
import Foreign.C
foreign export ccall foo :: CInt -> CInt
foo :: CInt -> CInt
foo = ...

we can build it into a shared library:

$ ghc --make -dynamic -shared -fPIC Foo.hs -o libfoo.so

We need to use -dynamic, -shared and -fPIC. The -dynamic flag tells ghc at the compile step to produce code so that it can link dynamically to dependent packages. At the link step it tells ghc to actually link dynamically to dependent packages. The -shared flag tells ghc to link a shared library rather than a program. The -fPIC flag tells ghc to make code that is suitable to include into a shared library. If we were to break it down into separate compile and link steps then we would use:

$ ghc -dynamic -fPIC -c Foo.hs
$ ghc -dynamic -shared Foo.o Foo_stub.o -o libfoo.so

In principle you can use -shared without -dynamic in the link step. That would mean to statically link the rts all the base libraries into your new shared library. This would make a very big, but standalone shared library. However that would require all the static libraries to have been built with -fPIC so that the code is suitable to include into a shared library and we don’t do that at the moment.

If we use ldd again to look at the libfoo.so that we’ve made we will notice that it is missing a dependency on the rts library. This is problem that we’ve yet to sort out, so for the moment we can just add the dependency ourselves:

$ ghc --make -dynamic -shared -fPIC Foo.hs -o libfoo.so \
  -lHSrts-ghc6.11 -optl-Wl,-rpath,/opt/ghc/lib/ghc-6.11/

The reason it’s not linked in yet is because we need to be able to switch which version of the rts we’re using without having to relink every library. For example we want to be able to switch between the debug, threaded and normal rts versions. It’s quite possible to do this and it just needs a bit more rearranging in the build system to sort it out. Once it’s done you’ll even be able to switch rts at runtime, eg:

$ LD_PRELOAD=/opt/ghc/lib/ghc-6.11/libHSrts_debug-ghc6.11.so
$ ./Hello

Going back to our libfoo.so, now that it is linked against the rts it is completely standalone, we can link it into a C program using just gcc, or we can use dlopen() to load libfoo.so at runtime.

Assuming we’ve got libfoo.so in the current directory, we can link it into a C program:

$ gcc main.c -o main -lfoo -L.

If you use ldd now it’ll tell you that libfoo.so is not found. Remember that the runtime linker doesn’t look in the same places as the static linker. We told the static linker to look in the current directory with the flag -L.. For the dynamic linker we can either move our libfoo.so to /usr/local/lib or we can embed a path into the binary that tells the runtime linker where to look. One particularly neat way to do this is to tell it to look for the library not at an absolute path, but relative to the program itself:

$ gcc main.c -o main -lfoo -L. -Wl,-rpath,'$ORIGIN'

The Linux runtime linker understands the special variable $ORIGIN and interprets it as the location of the executable. This also works on Solaris. Windows and OS X have something similar. This makes it possible to distribute binaries along with shared libraries and have the whole lot fully relocatable.

If we want to load the library and call functions at runtime we would use C code like:

void *dl = dlopen("./libfoo.so", RTLD_LAZY);
int (*foo)(int a) = dlsym(dl, "foo");
printf("%d\n", foo(2500));

In this case we do not need to link our C program against libfoo.so (we just need -ldl for the dynamic linking functions like dlopen).

$ gcc main.c -o main -ldl

Now one thing to watch out for is that before you call any exported Haskell function, you have to start up the runtime system. If you just call foo() directly then it’ll emit a helpful error message to remind you. We have to use the C API of the Haskell FFI to initialise the runtime system. This is a little tiresome. In our case it’ll look like:

hs_init(&argc, &argv);
hs_add_root(__stginit_Foo);

The first line is specified by the Haskell FFI. The second is a GHC’ism. It initialises the module containing the function we’re going to call.

If you’re exporting a plugin API then hopefully the API will support some kind of plugin initialisation. In that case you can include the above C code to initialise the rts before any of the Haskell functions get called. We can do that by adding the above initialisation code into a C function and export that from our shared lib:


void init (void);
void init (void) { ... }

Then we would add init into our shared lib:

$ ghc -fPIC -c init.c
$ ghc -dynamic -shared Foo.o Foo_stub.o init.o -o libfoo.so \
  -lHSrts-ghc6.11 -optl-Wl,-rpath,/opt/ghc/lib/ghc-6.11/

Of course the calling program has to call init() first.

If you have to support a C API where there is no initialiser then we can use this trick:


static void init (void) __attribute__ ((constructor));
void init (void) { ... }

The constructor attribute means the function will be called on program startup or as soon as the library is loaded via dlopen.

Next steps for the Haskell Platform

Wednesday, May 6th, 2009

Don just announced the first release of the Haskell Platform.

The intention of this first major release series is to get up to speed and test out our systems for making releases. We want to have everything working smoothly in time for GHC 6.12, when we hope to take over from the GHC team the task of making end-user releases.

We would like to thank the people who have worked on the release. Mikhail Glushenkov and Gregory Collins have put a lot of effort into the Windows and OSX installers. (We hope the OSX installer will be available in time for the next minor release.) We also received a lot of helpful feedback on the release candidates and the general release process from Claus Reinke, Sven Panne and Bulat Ziganshin. Many other people tested out release candidates on a range of systems. Thanks to everyone for all that.

Schedule

There will be follow-up minor releases 4 weeks and 10 weeks after this initial release. These will incorporate feedback on the installers and packaging. Your comments and feedback will be appreciated.

  • 2009.2.0, Monday 4th May (actual release slipped by one day)
  • 2009.2.1, Monday 1st June (4 weeks after .0)
  • 2009.2.2, Monday 13th July (6 weeks after .1)

Upcoming policy decisions

We have said that major releases will be on a 6 month schedule. Major releases may include new and updated packages, while minor releases will contain bug fixes and fixes for packaging problems.

There are many policy details that we have to sort out however. For example, how do we decide which packages to add to new releases? What quality standards should we demand?

Importantly, these policy decisions are not ones that Don and I want to make ourselves, and indeed we should not be the ones to make them. These are questions for the community to decide. The plan is to discuss them on the libraries mailing list in the coming weeks and months. However, to make sure that necessary decisions do actually get made I’m going to propose a steering committee. The members would have the task of talking to the release team, thinking about what needs to be decided and guiding discussions on the mailing list. They would also have to make sure policy decisions are recorded in the wiki and are communicated to the release team.

So, if you are interested in the direction and success of the platform then now is a good time to get involved. Keep an eye out for the discussions on the libraries mailing list. If you want to do some hacking then we still need more help to organise and automate our release processes.

Well-Typed at CUFP

Sunday, May 3rd, 2009

The Commercial Users of Functional Programming (CUFP) workshop is in Edinburgh this year, on the 4th September, along with the developer tracks on the 3rd and 5th. Both Duncan and I will be there, as well as at ICFP and the other co-located events. If you’ll be there then and would like to talk to us, either about Well-Typed or about the Industrial Haskell Group (IHG), then drop us an e-mail or just find us during the week.

In the mean time, if you’d like to give a 25 minute talk about your experiences with functional programming at CUFP, then you have just two weeks to submit a proposal. These talks are a great way for everyone to benefit from each others’ experiences. The call says:

Talks are typically 25 minutes long, but can be shorter. They aim to inform participants about how functional programming played out in real-world applications, focusing especially on the re-usable lessons learned, or insights gained. Your talk does not need to be highly technical; for this audience, reflections on the commercial, management, or software engineering aspects are, if anything, more important. You do not need to submit a paper! Talks on the practical application of functional programming with a primarily technical focus may also be appropriate for the adjacent DEFUN 2009 event.

If you are interested in offering a talk, or nominating someone to do so, send an e-mail to francesco(at)erlang-consulting(dot)com or jim(dot)d(dot)grundy(at)intel(dot)com by 15 May 2009 with a short description of what you’d like to talk about or what you think your nominee should give a talk about. Such descriptions should be about one page long.