If even one step in Body.initializeReq was executed at all, then
whether or not it succeeded, we consider the body component to have
been initialized, at least with respect to whether finalizeReq
ought to run.
We now run body.finalizeReq even if body.init wasn't called. We'll
do a finer-grained check on each aspect of Body that needs to be
finalized now. This check was too large-grained.
This leverages the new clean dynamic allocation of the globalMind
object to make the mrntt::main and SMO's initialization and
shutdown much cleaner. We no longer concern ourselves with
shutting down the Mind threads inside of mrntt::main, but rather
we leave that state machine to the Mind class and Mrntt component.
This makes the initialization sequence much cleaner and conceptually
well encapsulated.
We also now dynamically allocate the Mind objects. They're allocated
dynamically by Mrntt inside of initializeReq. This means that we no
longer have to worry about jolting and cleaning up the running threads
of global mind object even when we never explicitly called
Mind.initializeReq.
Along with other conceptual improvements to our abstractions, this
patch also gets us to a real "end of program initialization" point
for the first time.
We now allocate globalMind locally inside of marionetteMain. Why?
Before now, we had an asymmetric threading situation where the
globalMind's threads were initialized at during global constructor
invocation and not on demand. This meant that we had to shut down
those threads even if we had never got to the point of calling
Mind::initializeReq.
This significantly complicated our shutdown sequence since we had
to factor in the lifetime of the std::thread objects inside of the
ComponentThreads which were inside of the globalMind object.
Now, if we hadn't called Mind::initializeReq, we don't have to
perform any Mind::finalizeReq or adjacent operations. Shutdown is
symmetrically mirrored against the operations we actually performed
during execution.
We introduced some complexity by splitting ComponentThreads into
two derivative types (MindThread and MarionetteThread) but I think
in the long term we'll be able to massage this split into a much
cleaner situation overall.
In Mrntt, we now initialize Mind:: object threads before calling
initializeSalmanoffReq().
We've also propagated the spinscale async pattern into the Mind
class.
This is the culmination of a lot of changes over the last week. We're
making SMO basically fully async in many areas, and then preparing to
implement the spinqueueing mechanism for locking.
Now we have modularized the Mind class to contain all of its
ComponentThreads. This enables us to run multiple mind instances
within the same SMO process, at least in theory.
We probably won't actually do this, but we want to ensure that the
design is clean enough to enable it.
Gave me some ideas about how things should be structured. Apparently
merely using region-data-locked threads doesn't eliminate the need
for synchronization/locking. It just means your synchronization is much
lighter, in the form of localized variables.
It seems we'll need to maintain boolean trackers for certain
operations that shouldn't be performed concomitantly, and deny
the caller access to those operations in order to preserve
data sanity.
I guess we still ended up using locking after all. Tbh, I'm not even
sure this will make things end up being lighter: we may have to bounce
requests off, or perhaps re-enqueue them into the queue?
So maybe instead of bouncing requests off, we could re-add them to the
rear of the queue when they conflict with an ongoing request.
This language is used broadly to specify how to attach (and thus
also how to detach) devices to/from Salmanoff. The next bit of work
we'll do is split off the DSL parsing from the management of the
list of parsed binary attached spec objects.
We'll be creating a PipeDeviceAttachmentParser, and later on when
we support URDF, we'll create a URDFDeviceAttachmentParser.
hayodea