Re: TypedArrays:
1. Supported list of OSes can be found here: 
https://source.chromium.org/chromium/chromium/src/+/main:v8/include/v8config.h;l=65;drc=56816d76c121c8dd5b406dc6019350eee05f4abd,
 
the platforms are basically the subfolders of this 
one: https://source.chromium.org/chromium/chromium/src/+/main:v8/src/codegen/
2. I think only options b) or c) (copying or owning) are viable and safe, 
tbh. Option c) can be done as "pre-allocating" the TypedArray backing store 
before doing the call.

Re: External support - I see, I got confused that the External* is itself 
the C++ pointer we care about. Well, then similar to before, you could use 
a void* -> kExternalObject (or similar, which would be a new value in the `
CTypeInfo 
<https://source.chromium.org/chromium/chromium/src/+/main:v8/include/v8-fast-api-calls.h;drc=ca79bd5301566d1a3fc573c6e6858b5880c00fbd;bpv=1;bpt=1;l=238?q=v8-fast-api&ss=chromium%2Fchromium%2Fsrc&gsn=CTypeInfo&gs=kythe%3A%2F%2Fchromium.googlesource.com%2Fchromium%2Fsrc%3Flang%3Dc%252B%252B%3Fpath%3Dv8%2Finclude%2Fv8-fast-api-calls.h%23CTypeInfo%253Av8%2523c%2523e_ls0qYyK2W&gs=kythe%3A%2F%2Fchromium.googlesource.com%2Fchromium%2Fsrc%3Flang%3Dc%252B%252B%3Fpath%3Dv8%2Finclude%2Fv8-fast-api-calls.h%23dMPvmiRrvw3l_OsAMR9ohZmSdnWRW8R-_2NiNbbD7iY&gs=kythe%3A%2F%2Fchromium.googlesource.com%2Fchromium%2Fsrc%3Flang%3Dc%252B%252B%3Fpath%3Dv8%2Finclude%2Fv8-fast-api-calls.h%236wxW2bJwcslyangF4orYB2B15hGRi1fZ1AItHcr1mzg&gs=kythe%3A%2F%2Fchromium.googlesource.com%2Fchromium%2Fsrc%3Flang%3Dc%252B%252B%3Fpath%3Dv8%2Finclude%2Fv8-fast-api-calls.h%23mNHELKqnuizIokdjlQhDQwpDB8ko3WdwYlSnpqC7vTQ>::Type`
 
enum) mapping in the public header, then handle this kExternalObject 
similar to kV8Value. From the machine point of view, it's still only a 
machine word-sized pointer. And then we'll need tests that use it and some 
code in Turbofan to read out the External::Value out of the wrapper object 
and pass it as the void* param. Maybe we can setup a chat or pair-coding 
session in the coming days, I'm based in CET timezone.

Re: ops - thanks for the explanation, sounds really cool indeed.

Please let me know how can I further support you!
Maya

On Friday, September 30, 2022 at 2:20:10 PM UTC+2 [email protected] 
wrote:

> Re: Returning TypedArrays
> 1. Yeah, this definitely needs to be carefully considered. Is there any 
> easy listing of supported V8 compilation targets? A simple preliminary 
> study would be to just check good old Godbolt compiler against the list :)
> 2. This is indeed fraught with both potential user errors and plain bad 
> ideas. An example of what I've already implemented for Deno FFI for normal 
> binding functions is for users to get an ArrayBuffer out of a pointer with 
> a given byte length. This is useful, or even necessary, for some C APIs 
> where mutating memory through a pointer is needed. These are created with a 
> BackingStore using a noop deleter callback, so effectively the BackingStore 
> is not taking ownership of the data, just referencing it. However, lifetime 
> becomes an issue as of course the BackingStore does not know how long the 
> pointer is valid. Thus, a user error may lead to a use-after-free error. I 
> guess that's FFI for you. Generally though, from a V8 perspective, you 
> should be able to trust the fast call to return a proper length with the 
> pointer to be turned into a TypedArray. The only real issue, I think, is 
> how to deal with the three different options of:
> a) Reference TypedArray: V8 does not control the lifetime (dangerous since 
> now JS-side user error creates use-after-free)
> b) Copied TypedArray: V8 should copy byteLength bytes from the pointer.
> c) Owned TypedArray: The pointer is actually already owned by V8, ie. 
> somehow a fast call is returning a pointer it received from V8 in the first 
> place, or (if such an API is provided in the future) the fast call 
> allocated a buffer into V8 heap and is now returning it as a TypedArray.
> The return type CType might be used to tell V8 what it should do with such 
> a TypedArray but it's still fraught with danger. No easy answers here.
>
> Re: External support
> I think you might've misunderstood my meaning with passing External 
> pointers as parameters. I wasn't referring to an External* but instead the 
> void* that one would receive by calling the Local<External>::Value() 
> method. My original thinking was that lowered V8 code might even turn 
> Local<External> internally into the void* though the Value() method, but 
> thinking on it now it may not makes sense (how to return to the 
> Local<External> from the void*? So not a good idea.). So, in the end it 
> would be that a fast call with a declared void* parameter would expect to 
> find a Local<External> in that parameter slot, and will call the fast call 
> with the Local<External>::Value() return value in that parameter slot. So, 
> the C++ side will never even see the Local<External> but will instead 
> simply receive a pointer to whatever the External is pointing to. This is 
> why I expected this to be a bit harder than just working with the public 
> API file, as I expect this will need at least some work on the lowering 
> code.
>
> Re: ops layer
> The ops layer is how Deno binds the JS world to native code. Ops are 
> called from JS through eg. *Deno.core.ops.op_print("foo")*. This function 
> is a V8 FunctionTemplate instance, which will then call into the Rust code 
> that actually implements Deno's own console printing. And as said, each 
> op's V8 FunctionTemplate binding code is generated automatically and if the 
> parameters and return value of the Rust function match what Fast API is 
> capable of, the op FunctionTemplate will be created with a fast call.
>
> -Aapo
>
> On Friday, 30 September 2022 at 13:56:08 UTC+3 Maya Armyanova wrote:
>
>> Hi again,
>>
>> Regarding the void pointers, idea #2 sounds good to me too. I guess 
>> there's no really need to pre-allocate anything.
>>
>> Regarding returning TypedArrays as a pair of pointers - this sounds like 
>> an interesting idea indeed. Still, two questions come to my mind:
>> 1) this seems really platform specific and we should really carefully 
>> study all calling conventions we care about (and we have quite a few);
>> 2) "considerations of ownership, lifetime, copying, memory management" - 
>> yeah, this is what bothers me too. The fast API isn't really so much about 
>> safety, but it shouldn't open any obvious security holes. And returning a 
>> random address from C++ and providing that as a TypedArray elements store 
>> seems pretty fishy to me. I can imagine all kinds of dangers such as 
>> out-of-bounds reads or writes.
>>
>> Regarding External - small correction to what I wrote above, we can use a 
>> Local<External>, similar to Local<Value>. And a possible reason why it is 
>> slow (thanks to verwaest@) is that External is a full-blown JSObject, 
>> having its own elements and property backing store, which is unused for C++ 
>> objects (which it is supposed to represent).
>>
>> Re: Strings passed around as Values - wow, now this seems risky indeed. 
>> The worst we could stumble upon is again unexpected memory writes. Not sure 
>> how possible in reality that is, but I'll need to ping someone more 
>> familiar with security concerns.
>>
>> A noob question - what is the Deno ops layer and what would an engineer 
>> use it for?
>>
>> Regarding overload resolution with null parameters in the middle - yeah, 
>> the purpose of not supporting the full overload resolution logic that Web 
>> APIs have was to keep this code simpler. Otherwise at runtime time we'll 
>> need to repeat much of what Blink already does, possibly making the fast 
>> dispatch slower. Regarding the JSObject shapes, not sure how relevant that 
>> is, but we had an idea to provide the embedder with means of enumerating 
>> their C++ types and representing their hierarchy in V8 using those assigned 
>> numerical IDs. This would be super useful for Web APIs such as accessing 
>> e.g. Node.nodeType from various successors of Node (such as Div).
>>
>> Regarding implementing External support - again a correction, you could 
>> have a Local<External> on the C++ side. And you could already try passing 
>> the External* or Local<External> as an argument and use the (obsolete) 
>> kApiObject parameter type. Add a mapping here 
>> https://source.chromium.org/chromium/chromium/src/+/main:v8/include/v8-fast-api-calls.h;l=666;drc=ca79bd5301566d1a3fc573c6e6858b5880c00fbd
>>  
>> from Local<External> to kApiObject, the low level machinery for it is still 
>> there. And how the C++ function takes the argument - as a raw pointer or as 
>> a Local - is actually the same for the generated code that calls it, so 
>> it's your call. If it works (or it doesn't), please feel free to upload a 
>> CL on Gerrit, happy to take a look.
>>
>> Good luck,
>> Maya
>>
>> On Friday, September 30, 2022 at 12:01:12 PM UTC+2 [email protected] 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hey,
>>>
>>> Thank you for getting back to me!
>>>
>>> I'm definitely interested in implementing Externals for C callbacks both 
>>> as parameters and as returns values. Returning void pointers should prove 
>>> to be more difficult I guess. I can see two ways to go about it:
>>> 1. Take the same route as you mention for returning TypedArrays, where 
>>> V8 will allocate a placeholder before calling the callback.
>>> 2. Simply have the C callback return the pointer and have V8 do the 
>>> allocation after calling it. I presume this should be doable since the 
>>> return value CType can (or perhaps "should") be trusted to speak the truth, 
>>> and returning a pointer does not cause any issues calling convention wise.
>>>
>>> My personal preference is definitely on #2, as it feels more "natural" 
>>> and contains less indirection. It also has the slight benefit of not doing 
>>> any unnecessary allocations for the External when the fast callback signals 
>>> a need to deopt using the fallback flag.
>>>
>>> I wonder if #2 could be used to likewise implement TypedArray returning? 
>>> I can't exactly remember the System V ABI for C++ structures but I seem to 
>>> recall that a structure with a size of up two two pointers worth can be 
>>> returned through RAX and an extra register (that is, as long as the class 
>>> does not have an non-trivial copy constructors or destructor). Other ABIs 
>>> might of course differ on that. Still, if it happened to be so that all 
>>> ABIs allowed returning two pointers, it would mean that a C callback could 
>>> return the same TypedArray struct that is used to pass them in as 
>>> parameters. (I'm skipping considerations of ownership, lifetime, copying, 
>>> memory management and all that because it gets hard and ruins my idea 
>>> pretty well :D )
>>>
>>> On Strings: It turns out that as long as one keeps a pointer to the 
>>> Isolate somewhere, it's already possible to support String parameters in 
>>> fast calls, at least to a limited and possibly unstable degree. See this PR 
>>> of mine: https://github.com/denoland/deno/pull/16014
>>> Essentially, if a parameter is declared as v8::Value then it will 
>>> happily accept a String as well, and with the Isolate pointer it is then 
>>> possible to write the string data out. I'm unsure of the safety of this, I 
>>> expect it should panic on roped strings as V8 flattens them but so far I've 
>>> not seen clear evidence of that happening.
>>>
>>> I personally think that a limited C string return only -kind of string 
>>> support would not be a good idea. As an example, I expect that the Chrome / 
>>> Blink team would find good use for returning of UTF8 strings in atob / btoa 
>>> and TextDecoder APIs. (And so would Deno.) Again here I ponder on the 
>>> possibility of the option #2 above.
>>>
>>> About Deno's interest in Fast API in general: I'm not part of the Deno 
>>> team, and am only contributing to the FFI and a little bit on the core ops 
>>> (JS <-> Rust binding) layer so I cannot truly speak for what the team 
>>> considers important and am just speaking for myself. That being said:
>>> 1. Deno's FFI API relies heavily on Fast API. Every foreign library's 
>>> symbol (C function) that a user wants to use will by default use the Fast 
>>> API. Only symbols that call back into V8 need to / should opt out of this 
>>> using a "callback" boolean option.
>>> Adding more supported types to Fast API directly adds to wider and 
>>> better support for Deno FFI. As an example, currently returning of 64 bit 
>>> integers (eg. pointers) is done via a TypedArray out pointer, where the 
>>> pointer is written into. If returning of External objects was possible, 
>>> this out pointer system and its (slight) performance overhead could be 
>>> removed. (And most importantly, numbers-as-pointers insecurity could be 
>>> eliminated.)
>>> Returning of C strings would allow Deno FFI to have "native" support of 
>>> those (currently C string extraction is done via a separate method).
>>>
>>> 2. Deno's ops layer has recently moved to using Fast API by default 
>>> where possible. Deno's binding functions are written as normal Rust 
>>> functions and an ops macro takes care of writing the binding logic to V8's 
>>> FunctionTemplate.
>>> Due to the near-universality of the ops macro, any Fast API binding 
>>> logic needs to only be written once and the macro will take care of taking 
>>> setting up the bindings for all ops that are bindable. Thus, here even more 
>>> than with FFI, having more supported types leads near-automatically to 
>>> faster binding layer in Deno, which is very much of interest to the Deno 
>>> team.
>>> Some examples:
>>> * FFI might not benefit from Strings as parameters that much, since 
>>> foreign APIs would only expect C strings. Deno ops however very much would 
>>> like to get arbitrary (UTF8) strings in fast calls. They would also love to 
>>> return arbitrary UTF8 strings.
>>> * FFI only cares about returning pointers in some form, External being 
>>> the most logical. Deno ops would very much want to return TypedArrays of 
>>> varying sizes, and they would not mind being explicit about memory 
>>> management either.
>>> * ops have cases where eg. a String or TypedArray parameter might be 
>>> optional. Overloads are already supported to a degree, but eg. null 
>>> parameters in the middle currently are not supported directly (except as 
>>> v8::Values which I'm not sure if it would ruin the "better typed" overload 
>>> matching)
>>> * (Completely impossible stretch goal): Some ops take objects of some 
>>> given shape. If V8 were to match its JS object shapes to a declared 
>>> parameter struct shape, now that would be impossibly cool. Also, probably 
>>> too hard to feasibly do but a man can dream.
>>>
>>>
>>> This has become a massive, meandering writeup. Sorry about that.
>>>
>>> Back onto topic: If you can give me some pointers on where I should look 
>>> to add the External<JSExternalObject> stuff for, I would much appreciate 
>>> it. I would personally also prefer to write the code such that the C 
>>> callback receives not the v8::External object but is directly called with 
>>> the pointer that the External represents. This I expect to require some 
>>> changes in the lowering code.
>>>
>>> Thank you for your time
>>> -Aapo Alasuutari
>>>
>>> On Friday, 30 September 2022 at 11:23:56 UTC+3 [email protected] 
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> First of all I'm really sorry for the late reply, I didn't see Leszek's 
>>>> ping in time.
>>>>
>>>> External sounds like the right type to represent embedder pointers, 
>>>> though the poor performance you report sounds unfortunate. Tbh I'm not 
>>>> aware of particular efforts to optimize it, but it might be indeed due to 
>>>> the ExternalMap. I'll check with colleagues if it's possible to do 
>>>> something about the performance there.
>>>>
>>>> On the main topic, adding C callbacks that accept an argument of type 
>>>> External<JSExternalObject 
>>>> <https://source.chromium.org/chromium/chromium/src/+/main:v8/src/objects/js-objects.h;drc=ca79bd5301566d1a3fc573c6e6858b5880c00fbd;bpv=1;bpt=1;l=911?gsn=JSExternalObject&gs=kythe%3A%2F%2Fchromium.googlesource.com%2Fchromium%2Fsrc%3Flang%3Dc%252B%252B%3Fpath%3Dv8%2Fsrc%2Fobjects%2Fjs-objects.h%23JSExternalObject%253Ainternal%253Av8%2523c%2523iz6AV1GPx3E&gs=kythe%3A%2F%2Fchromium.googlesource.com%2Fchromium%2Fsrc%3Flang%3Dc%252B%252B%3Fpath%3Dv8%2Fsrc%2Fobjects%2Fjs-objects.h%23JSExternalObject%253Ainternal%253Av8%2523c%2523bNyn58S6iE1&gs=kythe%3A%2F%2Fchromium.googlesource.com%2Fchromium%2Fsrc%3Flang%3Dc%252B%252B%3Fpath%3Dv8%2Fsrc%2Fobjects%2Fjs-objects.h%23E1nu-FvBjuQ-EDx8Ny1DO3ZL7UJtt6bOOeiU34UFYGw&gs=kythe%3A%2F%2Fchromium.googlesource.com%2Fchromium%2Fsrc%3Flang%3Dc%252B%252B%3Fpath%3Dout%2Fandroid-Debug%2Fgen%2Fv8%2Ftorque-generated%2Fclass-forward-declarations.h%23oOxlJQnIiQ9TdjrwzIe-NzNBbjuKOvOptxzBUUoilOc&gs=kythe%3A%2F%2Fchromium.googlesource.com%2Fchromium%2Fsrc%3Flang%3Dc%252B%252B%3Fpath%3Dout%2Fandroid-Debug%2Fgen%2Fv8%2Ftorque-generated%2Fsrc%2Fobjects%2Fjs-objects-tq.inc%23L9uwfd2l6uOWvbRRILcxKp1VYllIsCCFPIecleuaEFI&gs=kythe%3A%2F%2Fchromium.googlesource.com%2Fchromium%2Fsrc%3Flang%3Dc%252B%252B%3Fpath%3Dv8%2Fsrc%2Fheap%2Fobjects-visiting.h%23TyseKlOYyb_hrIxmiwvcWeGQvP1INehKCer2kV7xG6o&gs=kythe%3A%2F%2Fchromium.googlesource.com%2Fchromium%2Fsrc%3Flang%3Dc%252B%252B%3Fpath%3Dout%2Fchromeos-Debug%2Fgen%2Fv8%2Ftorque-generated%2Fclass-forward-declarations.h%23-xwKU2vBSmUrnUm0jR5GI1mRjxJU6CM4EWCILgXHArg&gs=kythe%3A%2F%2Fchromium.googlesource.com%2Fchromium%2Fsrc%3Flang%3Dc%252B%252B%3Fpath%3Dout%2Fchromeos-Debug%2Fgen%2Fv8%2Ftorque-generated%2Fsrc%2Fobjects%2Fjs-objects-tq.inc%233_drfRrSdKh0O1Osknb0zTSBaGNV_S6BOBULYV3JPWM&gs=kythe%3A%2F%2Fchromium.googlesource.com%2Fchromium%2Fsrc%3Flang%3Dc%252B%252B%3Fpath%3Dout%2Ffuchsia-Debug%2Fgen%2Fv8%2Ftorque-generated%2Fclass-forward-declarations.h%234v0WVozoJqd2EihNGkWvPiA8BoPsJcdwXuoyVp6QHOQ&gs=kythe%3A%2F%2Fchromium.googlesource.com%2Fchromium%2Fsrc%3Flang%3Dc%252B%252B%3Fpath%3Dout%2Ffuchsia-Debug%2Fgen%2Fv8%2Ftorque-generated%2Fsrc%2Fobjects%2Fjs-objects-tq.inc%23LSy3_Kz2Yjawt37W-b83WmwOsNDUY4ajMD0DAb7V3Mc&gs=kythe%3A%2F%2Fchromium.googlesource.com%2Fchromium%2Fsrc%3Flang%3Dc%252B%252B%3Fpath%3Dout%2FDebug%2Fgen%2Fv8%2Ftorque-generated%2Fclass-forward-declarations.h%23mTH4BKG-IJiVtR9UIw5dWrwbrfkz9qT70rqpwU4XjrU&gs=kythe%3A%2F%2Fchromium.googlesource.com%2Fchromium%2Fsrc%3Flang%3Dc%252B%252B%3Fpath%3Dout%2FDebug%2Fgen%2Fv8%2Ftorque-generated%2Fsrc%2Fobjects%2Fjs-objects-tq.inc%23whuyQbV2vlE-tTFI1uVnQfjP17lKMmgcfoUlNVo-Klw&gs=kythe%3A%2F%2Fchromium.googlesource.com%2Fchromium%2Fsrc%3Flang%3Dc%252B%252B%3Fpath%3Dout%2Fmac-Debug%2Fgen%2Fv8%2Ftorque-generated%2Fclass-forward-declarations.h%23GzTsTV0SjMocKlp1gFc9rdY5cM8CLb1snxpk-K_Yl6w&gs=kythe%3A%2F%2Fchromium.googlesource.com%2Fchromium%2Fsrc%3Flang%3Dc%252B%252B%3Fpath%3Dout%2Fmac-Debug%2Fgen%2Fv8%2Ftorque-generated%2Fsrc%2Fobjects%2Fjs-objects-tq.inc%23e8ogLQjp7_4HdRE3K0x5oqhCsc1cPbcQrRxJ93YsGgY&gs=kythe%3A%2F%2Fchromium.googlesource.com%2Fchromium%2Fsrc%3Flang%3Dc%252B%252B%3Fpath%3Dout%2Fwebview-Debug%2Fclang_x86_v8_arm%2Fgen%2Fv8%2Ftorque-generated%2Fclass-forward-declarations.h%23eCSrpBoyJxJqKLLRwerXtYRgNRCFPzhqMlFvXB1GgXk&gs=kythe%3A%2F%2Fchromium.googlesource.com%2Fchromium%2Fsrc%3Flang%3Dc%252B%252B%3Fpath%3Dout%2Fwebview-Debug%2Fclang_x86_v8_arm%2Fgen%2Fv8%2Ftorque-generated%2Fsrc%2Fobjects%2Fjs-objects-tq.inc%23zx7jBWmo0iWo0ZDZ_UwWDKwgXrTwOQ0CKrx6zw1BU6c&gs=kythe%3A%2F%2Fchromium.googlesource.com%2Fchromium%2Fsrc%3Flang%3Dc%252B%252B%3Fpath%3Dout%2Fwin-Debug%2Fgen%2Fv8%2Ftorque-generated%2Fclass-forward-declarations.h%23GSrIGaBEY2iOQfmCfE72vSRo9s9ew9qMP3oJBgobGP8&gs=kythe%3A%2F%2Fchromium.googlesource.com%2Fchromium%2Fsrc%3Flang%3Dc%252B%252B%3Fpath%3Dout%2Fwin-Debug%2Fgen%2Fv8%2Ftorque-generated%2Fsrc%2Fobjects%2Fjs-objects-tq.inc%23qHEyn9vHXkb7XJTCTYp5eFzZgB9YbJdsNIcS6VDvHxw>>
>>>>  
>>>> should be doable, given that memory wise External has the same 
>>>> representation as v8::Value (which we support to pass regular 
>>>> v8::Object's). It should mostly be an addition to the public interface 
>>>> file, which I can guide you into implementing, if you're interested.
>>>>
>>>> Regarding the other two points:
>>>>  - Strings - we decided for now to leave them out of the API, due to 
>>>> the large number of string types in V8, which would make the 
>>>> implementation 
>>>> annoyingly complex. We talked about possibly adding limited support for 
>>>> return string types only, as the C++ -> JS direction would need support 
>>>> only for plain C strings. Still, I don't have any particular plan to 
>>>> implement it in the near future, but would be happy to support you if it's 
>>>> an important feature for Deno.
>>>>  - Returning TypedArrays - this is again somewhat cumbersome, as the 
>>>> TypedArray object would need to be allocated as a placeholder from the 
>>>> generated code before calling out to the C++ callback, as the callback 
>>>> itself is not allowed to allocate. It should be generally doable, but we 
>>>> didn't have a use case until now.
>>>>
>>>> Hope this helps, will let you know once I learn more about v8::External 
>>>> performance.
>>>>
>>>> All the best,
>>>> Maya
>>>>
>>>> On Friday, September 30, 2022 at 7:36:21 AM UTC+2 [email protected] 
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Still hoping to get some guidance with this.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm also interested in support, even if limited, for string value 
>>>>> parameters (or even return values) and returning of TypedArray buffers. 
>>>>> Though, I expect those to be much harder to implement than returning 
>>>>> External objects for void pointers. I guess a somewhat related option is 
>>>>> to 
>>>>> return external pointers as zero-sized TypedArrays / ArrayBuffers, but 
>>>>> that 
>>>>> sounds quite wrong compared to External objects.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Friday, 23 September 2022 at 15:15:10 UTC+3 Aapo Alasuutari wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I presume Maya might now be back be at the office?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Would it be possible to get some guidance regarding implementing void 
>>>>>> pointer support, either here on Groups or possibly by organizing an 
>>>>>> online 
>>>>>> meeting of some sort?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -Aapo
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tuesday, 23 August 2022 at 11:32:30 UTC+3 [email protected] 
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi, yes, Maya is out until mid-september.
>>>>>>> Cheers, Camillo
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Tue, 23 Aug 2022 at 07:07, Aapo Alasuutari <[email protected]> 
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Has Maya possibly returned from vacation? Or is their leave still 
>>>>>>>> continuing?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Friday, 29 July 2022 at 12:08:53 UTC+3 [email protected] wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Maya is on leave over the summer, unfortunately.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Jul 29, 2022 at 11:02 AM Leszek Swirski <
>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> +Maya, you're probably the best person to answer this.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jul 26, 2022 at 9:05 PM Aapo Alasuutari <
>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Hello,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I'm interested in implementing `void*` pointer support for Fast 
>>>>>>>>>>> API calls. My thinking was that V8's `External` objects are 
>>>>>>>>>>> appropriate to 
>>>>>>>>>>> stand in for external `void*` pointers coming in from external code 
>>>>>>>>>>> and 
>>>>>>>>>>> going back out, since that's what they're (presumably) meant for.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Unfortunately this seems to be a complex endeavour, a bit more 
>>>>>>>>>>> than I can start hacking together directly. I'm also not sure if 
>>>>>>>>>>> the 
>>>>>>>>>>> `Sandboxify JSExternalObject external pointer` PR will complicate 
>>>>>>>>>>> this plan 
>>>>>>>>>>> of mine.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The origin of my interest is Deno FFI support, that is calling 
>>>>>>>>>>> native libraries from Deno JS runtime that uses the V8 engine. 
>>>>>>>>>>> Recent 
>>>>>>>>>>> changes to the FFI have added V8 Fast API support and made the FFI 
>>>>>>>>>>> a lot 
>>>>>>>>>>> faster, but unfortunately we're bound to using plain numbers as 
>>>>>>>>>>> pointers, 
>>>>>>>>>>> meaning both that creating pointers is as easy as just writing a 
>>>>>>>>>>> number and 
>>>>>>>>>>> that (Fast API compatible) pointers are limited to 53 bit numbers 
>>>>>>>>>>> which 
>>>>>>>>>>> will not be enough for eg. pointer cryptography on ARM v8.3.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> It believe it would be preferable if Deno could use `External` 
>>>>>>>>>>> objects to stand for pointers but this would negate the current 
>>>>>>>>>>> Fast API 
>>>>>>>>>>> performance benefits. Thus, `void*` pointer support for fast calls.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Any comments? Suggestions on how I might best proceed with this 
>>>>>>>>>>> to implement it? Or is this perhaps not a reasonable idea?
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Side note: I was sad to find that getting the pointer value out 
>>>>>>>>>>> of an `Local<External>` is measurably slower than getting the 
>>>>>>>>>>> pointer 
>>>>>>>>>>> number value out of a `Local<Number>`. This is presumably due to 
>>>>>>>>>>> the 
>>>>>>>>>>> `External` internally saving the pointer in the `ExternalMap`. The 
>>>>>>>>>>> slower 
>>>>>>>>>>> performance is still a bit sad, from having expected `External` to 
>>>>>>>>>>> be the 
>>>>>>>>>>> main public API meant to handle external pointers.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> -- 
>>>>>>>>>>> -- 
>>>>>>>>>>> v8-dev mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>>>>>>> http://groups.google.com/group/v8-dev
>>>>>>>>>>> --- 
>>>>>>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the 
>>>>>>>>>>> Google Groups "v8-dev" group.
>>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from 
>>>>>>>>>>> it, send an email to [email protected].
>>>>>>>>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit 
>>>>>>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/v8-dev/a4914444-88bf-4238-828c-9ec3f2e09878n%40googlegroups.com
>>>>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/v8-dev/a4914444-88bf-4238-828c-9ec3f2e09878n%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>>>>>>>>>>> .
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> -- 
>>>>>>>>>> -- 
>>>>>>>>>> v8-dev mailing list
>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>>>>>> http://groups.google.com/group/v8-dev
>>>>>>>>>> --- 
>>>>>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the 
>>>>>>>>>> Google Groups "v8-dev" group.
>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, 
>>>>>>>>>> send an email to [email protected].
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit 
>>>>>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/v8-dev/CAGRskv_o%3DdZTXdYAceSM%2BdaabpJKFYZwEFMjvzS3_8jy3e0TuQ%40mail.gmail.com
>>>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/v8-dev/CAGRskv_o%3DdZTXdYAceSM%2BdaabpJKFYZwEFMjvzS3_8jy3e0TuQ%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>>>>>>>>>> .
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> -- 
>>>>>>>> -- 
>>>>>>>> v8-dev mailing list
>>>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>>>> http://groups.google.com/group/v8-dev
>>>>>>>> --- 
>>>>>>>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google 
>>>>>>>> Groups "v8-dev" group.
>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, 
>>>>>>>> send an email to [email protected].
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> To view this discussion on the web visit 
>>>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/v8-dev/17c3b560-e88d-41a7-b64d-d792b4021613n%40googlegroups.com
>>>>>>>>  
>>>>>>>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/v8-dev/17c3b560-e88d-41a7-b64d-d792b4021613n%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
>>>>>>>> .
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Camillo Bruni |  Software Engineer, V8 |  Google Germany GmbH |  
>>>>>>> Erika-Mann 
>>>>>>> Str. 33, 80636 München 
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Registergericht und -nummer: Hamburg, HRB 86891 | Sitz der 
>>>>>>> Gesellschaft: Hamburg | Geschäftsführer: Paul Manicle, Halimah 
>>>>>>> DeLaine Prado
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Diese E-Mail ist vertraulich. Falls Ssie diese fälschlicherweise 
>>>>>>> erhalten haben sollten, leiten Sie diese bitte nicht an jemand anderes 
>>>>>>> weiter, löschen Sie alle Kopien und Anhänge davon und lassen Sie mich 
>>>>>>> bitte 
>>>>>>> wissen, dass die E-Mail an die falsche Person gesendet wurde.  This 
>>>>>>> e-mail is confidential. If you received this communication by mistake, 
>>>>>>> please don't forward it to anyone else, please erase all copies and 
>>>>>>> attachments, and please let me know that it has gone to the wrong 
>>>>>>> person.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>

-- 
-- 
v8-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://groups.google.com/group/v8-dev
--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"v8-dev" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/v8-dev/ea28f977-996b-446f-9b2a-b06987480aecn%40googlegroups.com.

Reply via email to