mirror of
https://github.com/MobileGL-Dev/MobileGL
synced 2026-11-07 01:53:24 +09:00
BZLZHH
4e48702f26
The create window could not collect its deferred answers. The previous commit
diagnosed that as the reply pool being 8 slots deep against 55,903 replies in one
frame, and left a no-reply bit as the way out. This lands that bit, measures it on
the device, and reports that the diagnosis was half wrong.
WHAT LANDED. ClientSession::EmitAndWaitTails takes a second question beside
wantReply: willReadReply. They are not the same question and the window is the case
that separates them - it emits with wantReply=false and READS the answer later, so
its records must still be answered. kRecNoReply (RingRecordFlags bit 5, which
aliases kOptional in the call-flag space; the flag-space asserts were extended and
the alias named) is stamped when willReadReply is false, and the decoder skips
PostReply while keeping every acceptance counter - "nobody reads the answer" is not
"nothing happened". The two illegal combinations are Fatal by name.
Three call sites say it: SetTextureParams for a confirmed object, the respecify
row's fire-and-forget half, and sub-data where MGPipeSubDataWantsItsReply decides.
MEASURED ON THE DEVICE (aikjs4s8cys8ba7l, rebuilt APK + client, both halves new):
server: skipped=50,001 answered=4,521 (a frame's replies: 55,903 -> 4,543)
client: Reply frames received seen=4,501, latest seq=97,181
frame-sent: identical per op, records untouched
create row: by_op 2 = 9,070 (was 4,536) - because the drain's blocking take is
now counted, so the row's number stays honest instead of reading as
"create stopped waiting" while the waiting merely moved
AND THE WINDOW STILL READ BACK NOTHING: readfail 8,951 -> 8,872, i.e. -0.9%.
THE REAL CAUSE, from the miss probe:
P12miss n=1 want=310 replySeq=1504 ring=[1175..1504]
P12miss n=9001 want=310 replySeq=102915 ring=[102866..102915]
want=310 every time. The drain is STRICTLY FIFO and a failed read has no way out -
it retries the same head for ever. Any reply buffer is bounded by design (8 pool
slots, or the 8-frame ring the stream link now keeps), so with 4,536 deferred
answers at least one is overwritten before it is read, and that one wedges the
window permanently. Cutting the churn by two orders of magnitude does not help: it
turns a certainty into a certainty. That is the constraint, not the depth.
THE FIX IS NAMED AND NOT TAKEN (the goal this work ran under stops here on purpose).
On a failed read of the head, abandon it: MGPipeNoteHandleUnpublished +
NoteCreateSuspect + pop - the DECLINE path reused for "unknown". The window then
self-heals through the blocking path and the object merely gets slower. It needs its
own gate: a failed read must let the window ADVANCE.
Gates, all green (172 + 13 + 22 + 103):
PipeWireCodecTest.TheNoReplyBitSkipsTheAnswerAndKeepsTheAcceptanceRecord - the skip,
the kept tally, the answered/skipped split, and the negative control that a record
WITHOUT the bit is still answered (a server that stopped answering everything
would otherwise pass)
RemoteClientControls.ACreateWindowDefersTheAnswersAndTheWindowOffDoesNot - now also
asserts the answers CAME BACK (answers_taken=11, outstanding=1, fallbacks=0 against
12 records). RED-ONCE PROVED: giving the window's creates the literal
"fire-and-forget => skip" predicate makes this case fail.
RingTest - the sixth and last flag alias, and the hand-written exhaustiveness list
extended (with a note that it is only as exhaustive as that list).
Server side: AnsweredRecords()/SkippedAnswers() - the number that made this
debuggable, since a wire change whose effect is invisible is undebuggable.
Client-first is safe: an old server ignores bit 5 and replies as before, so the two
cross-version directions degrade to today's behaviour - this is "both ends must
upgrade to take EFFECT", not "to avoid breaking". Hit that in practice first.
阶段笔记（notes）
这一层放各阶段的全部细节：每个阶段一个目录，目录里的 README.md 是该阶段的汇总（摘要、阶段表原行、逐门实测、落地形状、当时的进度页），其余文件是那个阶段的原始工作笔记——包计划（BRIEF-*.md / TASK-*.md）、契约草稿、集成者逐条裁定（INTEGRATOR-DECISIONS-*.md）、只读审计与普查、包报告、设备记录与证据。顶层的索引（../ROADMAP.md、../MEASUREMENTS.md、../CURRENT_STAGE_PROGRESS.md）只留一句话并链到这里；不属于某个阶段的设计正文在 ../design/，上手与参考在 ../guide/。
按阶段
| 阶段 | 汇总 | 重要文件 |
|---|---|---|
| P0 卫生、度量、门、骨架 | p0/ |
BRIEF-P0.md、p0-device-findings.md |
| P0.5 值头与制品头 | p05/ |
BRIEF-P05.md、p05-results/ |
P1 PipeInputs + verify |
p1/ |
BRIEF-P1.md、P1-LANE-FINDINGS.md |
| P2 渲染状态 CSO | p2/ |
BRIEF-P2.md、INTEGRATOR-DECISIONS.md、ab/、bench/ |
| P3a 句柄 wave 1 | p3a/ |
BRIEF-P3A.md、INTEGRATOR-DECISIONS.md |
| P4a 句柄 wave 2 | p4a/ |
BRIEF-P4A.md、INTEGRATOR-DECISIONS.md、ab-redmi/ |
| P5 传输 + inproc | p5/ |
BRIEF-P5.md、PACKAGE-PREAMBLE.md、p5-results/ |
| P5b verb 迁移 | p5b/ |
BRIEF-P5B.md、p5b-results/p5b-close-codex-review.md |
| P5c 共享内存读点归零 | p5c/ |
p5c-audit-v1.md |
| P5d inproc 性能 | p5d/ |
P5D-INPROC-PERFORMANCE.md（报告）、RESULTS-P5D-R3.md |
| P5e run-ahead | p5e/ |
P5E-RUNAHEAD.md（报告）、INTEGRATOR-DECISIONS-P5E.md（ID-80..136）、TASK-*.md |
| P5f 一切状态上 wire | p5f/ |
P5F-WIRE-COMPLETENESS.md（计划）、close-report.md、magma-runahead.md、HANDOFF-CI-INPROC-20260920.md |
| P6 spawn transport | p6/ |
P6-SPAWN-PLAN.md、P6-CONTRACT-DRAFT.md、P6-ENDSTATE-REVIEW.md、a6-audit-v1.md、gate7-device-ab.md |
| P6.5 两轴传输 + 跨机 | p65/ |
evidence-index.md、validation-status.md、code-review-findings.md |
| P3b / P4b Espryt 深化 | p34b/ |
espryt-d1.md … espryt-d3.md |
| P7 Magma 全量迁移（含 Ph） | p7/ |
PLAN-PH-P34B-P7.md、INTEGRATOR-DECISIONS-P7.md（ID-P7-1..63）、HANDOFF-2026-09-23.md、device-window-*/；审查稿在 handoff/ |
| P12（当前）server 自有屏幕窗口 | p12/ |
PLAN-P12.md、INTEGRATOR-DECISIONS-P12.md、device/ |
| P8 / P9 / P10 / P11 / P13（待排） | p8/、p9/、p10/、p11/、p13/ |
目前只有路线图上的完整范围与出口门 |
跨阶段：DEBTS.md（仍开放的债务与去向）、OPEN-QUESTIONS.md（开放问题全文，编号稳定）；handoff/（P7 的集成者审查稿，路径被 P7 交接文档引用，保持原位）；recovered/（从失败的 workflow 运行里捞回的 P0–P2 期材料，wf1 设计定稿前的计划草案、wf2 P0、wf3 P0.5、wf4 P1、wf5 P2；与阶段目录逐字节重复的副本已于 2026-09-24 删除，只留独有的）。
旧引用怎么找
2026-09-24 整理时移动的文件（旧笔记、代码注释与契约里仍按旧名引用它们，文件名没变）：
| 旧位置 | 新位置 |
|---|---|
docs/Disaggregated/P5D-INPROC-PERFORMANCE.md |
p5d/P5D-INPROC-PERFORMANCE.md |
docs/Disaggregated/P5E-RUNAHEAD.md |
p5e/P5E-RUNAHEAD.md |
docs/Disaggregated/P5F-WIRE-COMPLETENESS.md |
p5f/P5F-WIRE-COMPLETENESS.md |
docs/Disaggregated/P6-SPAWN-PLAN.md、P6-CONTRACT-DRAFT.md、P6-ENDSTATE-REVIEW.md |
p6/ 同名文件 |
docs/Disaggregated/CURRENT_STAGE_STATUS.md |
并入 ../CURRENT_STAGE_PROGRESS.md；其中 P7 的出口门 / 已落地 / 真机三节在 p7/README.md，P12 部分在 p12/README.md |
旧 CURRENT_STAGE_PROGRESS.md 的 P6.5 第一波与 P6 收官快照 |
p65/README.md、p6/README.md |
| 当前阶段页的明细（带裁定编号的表、余项清单、证据位置） | p12/README.md 的"当前状态详情"节 |
docs/Disaggregated/devices/pin-verification-2026-09-07.md |
../guide/pin-verification-2026-09-07.md |
ARCHITECTURE.md 的设计正文（§1–§17、附 A / B） |
../design/ 下十个文件，编号不变；对照表在 ../ARCHITECTURE.md |
旧 README.md 的构建运行、代码地图、术语；旧 ROADMAP.md 的通用纪律 |
../guide/ |
按编号引用的旧章节（小节编号在新位置原样保留）：
| 旧引用 | 现在在 |
|---|---|
MEASUREMENTS.md §1 / §2 / §3 / §4 / §5 |
p0 / p1 / p2 / p3a / p4a 的"实测"节 |
MEASUREMENTS.md §6 / §7 / §8 / §9 |
p5 / p5b / p5c / p5d |
MEASUREMENTS.md §10 / §11 / §12 / §13 |
p5e（§10、§11）/ p6 / p34b |
ARCHITECTURE.md §17.1–§17.4 / §17.5 / §17.6 / §17.7 |
p5 / p5b / p5c / p5e 的"落地形状"节（../design/10-phase-shapes.md 留一张索引表） |
ROADMAP.md 阶段表某行、"P5c 计划与审计"、"立即的下一项：P6.5 第一波"、债务表、开放问题 |
对应阶段 README.md 的"阶段表行"节；p5c；p65；DEBTS.md（历史全表在 p5b 末节）；OPEN-QUESTIONS.md |
ARCHITECTURE.md:NNN、MEASUREMENTS.md:NNN 这类行号引用 |
指向写下它时的那个版本，今天已不对应；按上下文所说的节去找，或 git show <当时的头>:docs/Disaggregated/<文件> |
~/w7/notes/<phase>/<file>.md |
docs/Disaggregated/notes/<phase>/<file>.md（这些笔记原先只存在于一台机器的 ~/w7/notes/） |
收录规则
| 收录 | 全部 .md 笔记，以及阶段自己决定入库的小脚本、判读工装与证据摘要（如 p7/device-window-*/、p12/device/、p12/gate/） |
| 不收录 | 大体积、随每次运行重新产生、只在产生它的机器上有意义的证据数据：完整运行日志、APK 与 .idsig、nm 转储、设备 logcat。上层文档引用它们时给的是路径，不是内容 |
新阶段开工时建 notes/<阶段>/，把计划、裁定与报告都放进去；阶段收官时补齐该目录的 README.md 汇总，顶层索引只改一行。
不受 citation lint 管
CI 的文档引用 lint 只检查顶层、design/ 与 guide/（.github/workflows/test.yml），本目录不在其中，这是有意的：笔记里的 file:line 写在各自当时的代码头上，拿今天的 HEAD 解析必然大面积失败——那是它们作为历史记录的正确状态。要核对某份笔记的引用，用它自己声明的那个 revision：
python3 scripts/check_doc_citations.py --rev <当时的头> docs/Disaggregated/notes/<phase>/<file>.md