It's impressive how well laid out the content in this article is. The spacing, tables, and code segments all look pristine to me, which is especially helpful given how dense and technical the content is.
alcover · 6h ago
I often think this could maybe allow fantastic runtime optimisations. I realise this would be hardly debuggable but still..
barchar · 1h ago
It sometimes can, but you then have to balance the time spent optimizing against the time spent actually doing whatever you were optimizing.
Also on modern chips you must wait quite a number of cycles before executing modified code or endure a catastrophic performance hit. This is ok for loops and stuff, but makes a lot of the really clever stuff pointless.
The debuggers software breakpoints _are_ self-modifying code :)
vbezhenar · 6h ago
I used GNU lightning library once for such optimisation. I think it was ICFPC 2006 task. I had to write an interpreter for virtual machine. Naive approach worked but was slow, so I decided to speed it up a bit using JIT. It wasn't a 100% JIT, I think I just implemented it for loops but it was enough to tremendously speed it up.
userbinator · 5h ago
Programs from the 80s-90s are likely to have such tricks. I have done something similar to "hardcode" semi-constants like frame sizes and quantisers in critical loops related to audio and video decompression, and the performance gain is indeed measurable.
alcover · 5h ago
> "hardcode" semi-constants
You mean you somehow avoided a load. But what if the constant was already placed in a register ? Also how could you pinpoint the reference to your constant in the machine code ? I'm quite profane about all this.
ronsor · 5h ago
> Also how could you pinpoint the reference to your constant in the machine code?
Not OP, but often one uses an easily identifiable dummy pattern like 0xC0DECA57 or 0xDEADBEEF which can be substituted without also messing up the machine code.
mananaysiempre · 4h ago
If you’re willing to parse object files (a much easier proposition for ELF than for just about anything else), another option is to have the source code mention the constants as addresses of external symbols, then parse the relocations in the compiled object. Unfortunately, I’ve been unable to figure out a reliable recipe to get a C compiler to emit absolute relocations in position-independent code, even after restricting myself to GCC and Clang for x86 Linux; in some configurations it works and in others you (rather pointlessly) get a PC-relative one followed by an add.
userbinator · 4h ago
All the registers were already taken.
You use a label.
Retr0id · 6h ago
It already does, in the form of JIT compilation.
alcover · 6h ago
OK but I meant in already native code, like in a C program - no bytecode.
lmm · 1h ago
If you are generating or modifying code at runtime then how is that different from bytecode? Standardised bytecodes and JITs are just an organised way of doing the same thing.
connicpu · 4h ago
LuaJIT has a wonderful dynamic code generation system in the form of the DynASM[1] library. You can use it separately from LuaJIT for dynamic runtime code generation to create machine code optimized for a particular problem.
I guess in OpenBSD because of W ^ X this would not work?
mananaysiempre · 6h ago
Not as is, but I think OpenBSD permits you to map the same memory twice, once as W and once as X (which would be a reasonable hoop to jump through for JITs etc., except there’s no portable way to do it). ARM64 MacOS doesn’t even permit that, and you need to use OS-specific incantations[1] that essentially prohibit two JITs coexisting in the same process.
In Linux it also needs mprotect() to change the permissions on the page so it can write it. The OpenBSD man page[0] indicate that it supports this as well, though notes that not all implementations are guaranteed to allow it, but my guess is it would generally work.
It's not required on linux, if the ELF headers are set up such that the page is mapped rwx to begin with. (but rwx mappings are generally frowned upon from a security perspective)
akdas · 7h ago
I was thinking the same thing. Usually, you'd want to write the new code to a page that you mark as read and write, then switch that page to read and execute. This becomes tricky if the code that's doing the modifying is in the same page as the code being modified.
timewizard · 7h ago
The way it's coded it wouldn't; however, you can map the same shared memory twice. Once with R|W and a second time with R|X. Then you can write into one region and execute out of it's mirrored mapping.
Also on modern chips you must wait quite a number of cycles before executing modified code or endure a catastrophic performance hit. This is ok for loops and stuff, but makes a lot of the really clever stuff pointless.
The debuggers software breakpoints _are_ self-modifying code :)
You mean you somehow avoided a load. But what if the constant was already placed in a register ? Also how could you pinpoint the reference to your constant in the machine code ? I'm quite profane about all this.
Not OP, but often one uses an easily identifiable dummy pattern like 0xC0DECA57 or 0xDEADBEEF which can be substituted without also messing up the machine code.
You use a label.
[1]: https://luajit.org/dynasm.html
[1] https://developer.apple.com/documentation/apple-silicon/port...
[0] https://man.openbsd.org/mprotect.2