249 lines
		
	
	
	
		
			7.2 KiB
		
	
	
	
		
			HTML
		
	
	
	
	
	
			
		
		
	
	
			249 lines
		
	
	
	
		
			7.2 KiB
		
	
	
	
		
			HTML
		
	
	
	
	
	
| <html>
 | |
| <head>
 | |
| <title>Plan 9</title>
 | |
| </head>
 | |
| <body>
 | |
| 
 | |
| <h1>Plan 9</h1>
 | |
| 
 | |
| <p>Required reading: Plan 9 from Bell Labs</p>
 | |
| 
 | |
| <h2>Background</h2>
 | |
| 
 | |
| <p>Had moved away from the ``one computing system'' model of
 | |
| Multics and Unix.</p>
 | |
| 
 | |
| <p>Many computers (`workstations'), self-maintained, not a coherent whole.</p>
 | |
| 
 | |
| <p>Pike and Thompson had been batting around ideas about a system glued together 
 | |
| by a single protocol as early as 1984.
 | |
| Various small experiments involving individual pieces (file server, OS, computer)
 | |
| tried throughout 1980s.</p>
 | |
| 
 | |
| <p>Ordered the hardware for the ``real thing'' in beginning of 1989,
 | |
| built up WORM file server, kernel, throughout that year.</p>
 | |
| 
 | |
| <p>Some time in early fall 1989, Pike and Thompson were
 | |
| trying to figure out a way to fit the window system in.
 | |
| On way home from dinner, both independently realized that
 | |
| needed to be able to mount a user-space file descriptor,
 | |
| not just a network address.</p>
 | |
| 
 | |
| <p>Around Thanksgiving 1989, spent a few days rethinking the whole
 | |
| thing, added bind, new mount, flush, and spent a weekend 
 | |
| making everything work again.  The protocol at that point was
 | |
| essentially identical to the 9P in the paper.</p>
 | |
| 
 | |
| <p>In May 1990, tried to use system as self-hosting.
 | |
| File server kept breaking, had to keep rewriting window system.
 | |
| Dozen or so users by then, mostly using terminal windows to
 | |
| connect to Unix.</p>
 | |
| 
 | |
| <p>Paper written and submitted to UKUUG in July 1990.</p>
 | |
| 
 | |
| <p>Because it was an entirely new system, could take the
 | |
| time to fix problems as they arose, <i>in the right place</i>.</p>
 | |
| 
 | |
| 
 | |
| <h2>Design Principles</h2>
 | |
| 
 | |
| <p>Three design principles:</p>
 | |
| 
 | |
| <p>
 | |
| 1. Everything is a file.<br>
 | |
| 2. There is a standard protocol for accessing files.<br>
 | |
| 3. Private, malleable name spaces (bind, mount).
 | |
| </p>
 | |
| 
 | |
| <h3>Everything is a file.</h3>
 | |
| 
 | |
| <p>Everything is a file (more everything than Unix: networks, graphics).</p>
 | |
| 
 | |
| <pre>
 | |
| % ls -l /net
 | |
| % lp /dev/screen
 | |
| % cat /mnt/wsys/1/text
 | |
| </pre>
 | |
| 
 | |
| <h3>Standard protocol for accessing files</h3>
 | |
| 
 | |
| <p>9P is the only protocol the kernel knows: other protocols
 | |
| (NFS, disk file systems, etc.) are provided by user-level translators.</p>
 | |
| 
 | |
| <p>Only one protocol, so easy to write filters and other
 | |
| converters.  <i>Iostats</i> puts itself between the kernel
 | |
| and a command.</p>
 | |
| 
 | |
| <pre>
 | |
| % iostats -xvdfdf /bin/ls
 | |
| </pre>
 | |
| 
 | |
| <h3>Private, malleable name spaces</h3>
 | |
| 
 | |
| <p>Each process has its own private name space that it
 | |
| can customize at will.  
 | |
| (Full disclosure: can arrange groups of
 | |
| processes to run in a shared name space.  Otherwise how do
 | |
| you implement <i>mount</i> and <i>bind</i>?)</p>
 | |
| 
 | |
| <p><i>Iostats</i> remounts the root of the name space
 | |
| with its own filter service.</p>
 | |
| 
 | |
| <p>The window system mounts a file system that it serves
 | |
| on <tt>/mnt/wsys</tt>.</p>
 | |
| 
 | |
| <p>The network is actually a kernel device (no 9P involved)
 | |
| but it still serves a file interface that other programs
 | |
| use to access the network.
 | |
| Easy to move out to user space (or replace) if necessary:
 | |
| <i>import</i> network from another machine.</p>
 | |
| 
 | |
| <h3>Implications</h3>
 | |
| 
 | |
| <p>Everything is a file + can share files => can share everything.</p>
 | |
| 
 | |
| <p>Per-process name spaces help move toward ``each process has its own
 | |
| private machine.''</p>
 | |
| 
 | |
| <p>One protocol: easy to build custom filters to add functionality
 | |
| (e.g., reestablishing broken network connections).
 | |
| 
 | |
| <h3>File representation for networks, graphics, etc.</h3>
 | |
| 
 | |
| <p>Unix sockets are file descriptors, but you can't use the
 | |
| usual file operations on them.  Also far too much detail that
 | |
| the user doesn't care about.</p>
 | |
| 
 | |
| <p>In Plan 9: 
 | |
| <pre>dial("tcp!plan9.bell-labs.com!http");
 | |
| </pre>
 | |
| (Protocol-independent!)</p>
 | |
| 
 | |
| <p>Dial more or less does:<br>
 | |
| write to /net/cs: tcp!plan9.bell-labs.com!http
 | |
| read back: /net/tcp/clone 204.178.31.2!80
 | |
| write to /net/tcp/clone: connect 204.178.31.2!80
 | |
| read connection number: 4
 | |
| open /net/tcp/4/data
 | |
| </p>
 | |
| 
 | |
| <p>Details don't really matter.  Two important points:
 | |
| protocol-independent, and ordinary file operations
 | |
| (open, read, write).</p>
 | |
| 
 | |
| <p>Networks can be shared just like any other files.</p>
 | |
| 
 | |
| <p>Similar story for graphics, other resources.</p>
 | |
| 
 | |
| <h2>Conventions</h2>
 | |
| 
 | |
| <p>Per-process name spaces mean that even full path names are ambiguous
 | |
| (<tt>/bin/cat</tt> means different things on different machines,
 | |
| or even for different users).</p>
 | |
| 
 | |
| <p><i>Convention</i> binds everything together.  
 | |
| On a 386, <tt>bind /386/bin /bin</tt>.
 | |
| 
 | |
| <p>In Plan 9, always know where the resource <i>should</i> be
 | |
| (e.g., <tt>/net</tt>, <tt>/dev</tt>, <tt>/proc</tt>, etc.),
 | |
| but not which one is there.</p>
 | |
| 
 | |
| <p>Can break conventions: on a 386, <tt>bind /alpha/bin /bin</tt>, just won't
 | |
| have usable binaries in <tt>/bin</tt> anymore.</p>
 | |
| 
 | |
| <p>Object-oriented in the sense of having objects (files) that all
 | |
| present the same interface and can be substituted for one another
 | |
| to arrange the system in different ways.</p>
 | |
| 
 | |
| <p>Very little ``type-checking'': <tt>bind /net /proc; ps</tt>.
 | |
| Great benefit (generality) but must be careful (no safety nets).</p>
 | |
| 
 | |
| 
 | |
| <h2>Other Contributions</h2>
 | |
| 
 | |
| <h3>Portability</h3>
 | |
| 
 | |
| <p>Plan 9 still is the most portable operating system.
 | |
| Not much machine-dependent code, no fancy features
 | |
| tied to one machine's MMU, multiprocessor from the start (1989).</p>
 | |
| 
 | |
| <p>Many other systems are still struggling with converting to SMPs.</p>
 | |
| 
 | |
| <p>Has run on MIPS, Motorola 68000, Nextstation, Sparc, x86, PowerPC, Alpha, others.</p>
 | |
| 
 | |
| <p>All the world is not an x86.</p>
 | |
| 
 | |
| <h3>Alef</h3>
 | |
| 
 | |
| <p>New programming language: convenient, but difficult to maintain.
 | |
| Retired when author (Winterbottom) stopped working on Plan 9.</p>
 | |
| 
 | |
| <p>Good ideas transferred to C library plus conventions.</p>
 | |
| 
 | |
| <p>All the world is not C.</p>
 | |
| 
 | |
| <h3>UTF-8</h3>
 | |
| 
 | |
| <p>Thompson invented UTF-8.  Pike and Thompson
 | |
| converted Plan 9 to use it over the first weekend of September 1992,
 | |
| in time for X/Open to choose it as the Unicode standard byte format
 | |
| at a meeting the next week.</p>
 | |
| 
 | |
| <p>UTF-8 is now the standard character encoding for Unicode on
 | |
| all systems and interoperating between systems.</p>
 | |
| 
 | |
| <h3>Simple, easy to modify base for experiments</h3>
 | |
| 
 | |
| <p>Whole system source code is available, simple, easy to 
 | |
| understand and change.
 | |
| There's a reason it only took a couple days to convert to UTF-8.</p>
 | |
| 
 | |
| <pre>
 | |
|   49343  file server kernel
 | |
| 
 | |
|  181611  main kernel
 | |
|   78521    ipaq port (small kernel)
 | |
|   20027      TCP/IP stack
 | |
|   15365      ipaq-specific code
 | |
|   43129      portable code
 | |
| 
 | |
| 1326778  total lines of source code
 | |
| </pre>
 | |
| 
 | |
| <h3>Dump file system</h3>
 | |
| 
 | |
| <p>Snapshot idea might well have been ``in the air'' at the time.
 | |
| (<tt>OldFiles</tt> in AFS appears to be independently derived,
 | |
| use of WORM media was common research topic.)</p>
 | |
| 
 | |
| <h3>Generalized Fork</h3>
 | |
| 
 | |
| <p>Picked up by other systems: FreeBSD, Linux.</p>
 | |
| 
 | |
| <h3>Authentication</h3>
 | |
| 
 | |
| <p>No global super-user.
 | |
| Newer, more Plan 9-like authentication described in later paper.</p>
 | |
| 
 | |
| <h3>New Compilers</h3>
 | |
| 
 | |
| <p>Much faster than gcc, simpler.</p>
 | |
| 
 | |
| <p>8s to build acme for Linux using gcc; 1s to build acme for Plan 9 using 8c (but running on Linux)</p>
 | |
| 
 | |
| <h3>IL Protocol</h3>
 | |
| 
 | |
| <p>Now retired.  
 | |
| For better or worse, TCP has all the installed base.
 | |
| IL didn't work very well on asymmetric or high-latency links
 | |
| (e.g., cable modems).</p>
 | |
| 
 | |
| <h2>Idea propagation</h2>
 | |
| 
 | |
| <p>Many ideas have propagated out to varying degrees.</p>
 | |
| 
 | |
| <p>Linux even has bind and user-level file servers now (FUSE),
 | |
| but still not per-process name spaces.</p>
 | |
| 
 | |
| 
 | |
| </body>
 | 
