The C system API is a stable, versioned API, exposed through a singleton structure containing C function thunks. This allows multiple clients in the same application to use a single embedder-provided instance of Mojo, and allows these clients to be versioned and distributed independently of Mojo. Using C thunks also makes it easier to provide compatibility with other programming languages than C and C++.
When clients invoke on the Mojo public API, they go through the dispatch functions implemented in dispatcher.cc, which in turn forwards the call to a global instance of mojo::core::Core. Core further dispatches the calls to the implementation instance, which is either a mojo::core::Dispatcher, or a mojo::core::UserMessageImpl. In the case of a Dispatcher, the incoming MojoHandle is looked up in the mojo::core::HandleTable, which returns the Dispatcher corresponding to the MojoHandle.
The public API exposes the following concepts as MojoHandles:
These are implemented as subclasses of mojo::core::Dispatcher. The Dispatcher class implements the union of all possible operations on a MojoHandle, and the various subclasses implement the subset appropriate to their type.
Additionally the public API exposes Messages as MojoMessageHandles, which are simply an instance of a mojo::core::UserMessageImpl.
Mojo Core is multi-threaded, so any API can be used from any thread in a process. Receiving Messages from other Nodes is done on the “IO Thread”, which is an embedder-supplied task runner. Sending Messages to other Nodes is typically done on the sending thread. However, if the native IPC channel's buffer is full, the outgoing Message will be queued and subsequently sent on the “IO Thread”.
During the processing of an API call and during activity in the NodeController, various entities may change states, which can lead to the generation of TrapEvents to the user. The mojo::core::RequestContext takes care of aggregating Watchers that need dispatching and issuing outstanding TrapEvents as the last RequestContext in a thread goes out of scope.
This avoids calling out to user code from deep within Core, and the resulting reentrancy that might ensue.
Mojo Core is implemented on top of “Ports” and is an embedder of Ports.
Ports provides the base abstractions of addressing, mojo::core::ports::Node and mojo::core::ports::Port as well as the messaging and event handling for maintaining and transporting Port pairs across Nodes.
All routing and IPC is however delegated to the embedder, Mojo Core, via the mojo::core::NodeController which owns an instance of Node, and implements its delegate interface.
Nodes are named by a large (128 bit) random number. Ports are likewise named by a large (128 bit) random number. Messages are directed at a Port, and so are addressed by a (Node:Port) pair.
Each Port has precisely one “conjugate” Port at any point in time. When a Message is sent through a Port, its conjugate Port is the implicit destination, and this is a symmetrical relationship. The address of the conjugate Port can change as it is moved between nodes. In practice a Port is renamed each time it's moved between Nodes, and so changes in both components of the (Node:Port) address pair.
Note that since each Port has a single conjugate Port at any time, en-route Messages are addressed only with the destination Port address, as the source is implicit.
A process network initially starts with only the Broker process Node. New Nodes must be introduced to the broker by some means. This can be done by inheriting an IPC handle into a newly created process, or by providing them the name of a listening IPC channel they can connect to.
Each Node thus starts with only a direct IPC connection to a single other Node in the network. The first time a Node tries to forward a Message to a Node it doesn't have a direct IPC channel with, it will send a message to the broker to request an introduction to the new peer Node.
If the broker knows of the peer Node, it will construct a new native IPC channel, then hand one end of it to the requesting Node and one end to the new peer Node. This will result in a direct Node-to-Node link between the two, and so the topology of a process network will trend towards a fully connected graph.
A UserMessageImpl is the unit of transport in Mojo Core. This is a collection of
Mojo Core takes care of transferring and serializing and deserializing Handles and Ports. The user data on the other hand has to be serialized and deserialized by the user. Mojo Core optimizes this by allowing the user data to be serialized only at need, e.g. when a Message is routed to another Node.
A Node maintains a set of Ports local to that Node.
Logically, each Port has a conjugate Port where all its Messages are destined. However, when a Port is transferred to a different Node, the newly created Port on the destination Node will have the transferred Port as its next-hop “Proxy” Port it sends Messages to. The Proxy Port is responsible for delivering in-progress Messages across to the new destination Port, and may buffer Messages to that end. Once a Proxy Port has delivered all in-progress Messages, it is dissolved and Messages start flowing through the next Peer Port in turn, which may be the conjugate Port or another Proxy Port.
Each Port maintains state relating to its:
The unit of messaging at this level is the mojo::core::ports::Event, which has several sub-types relating to the business of maintaining and transporting Ports and keeping their Peer Port address up to date.
The UserMessageEvent subclass is the event type that carries all user messaging. A UserMessageEvent owns a mojo::core::ports::UserMessage, which is the interface to the embedder‘s Message type. Mojo Core implements this in mojoe::core::UserMessageImpl. Note that at the Ports level, this is simply opaque user data. It’s the Mojo Core embedder that is aware of the handles and data attached to a UserMessageImpl.
Note that if a Port is transferred across multiple Nodes, it may end up with a multi-leg Peer relationship. As result, and because different Messages for the same Port may take different routes through the process network, out of order Message delivery is possible. The incoming mojo::core::ports::MessageQueue takes care of re-ordering incoming Messages.
The Node does all Message handling and delivery for its local Ports, but delegates all routing to its delegate through the mojo::core::ports::NodeDelegate interface. Mojo Core implements this in mojo::core::NodeController.
The business of handling Node to Node IPC is primarily handled in mojo::core::NodeChannel as well as mojo::core::Channel and its OS-specific subclasses by exchanging mojo::core::Channel::Messages.
Note that a Channel::Message always goes from a source Node to a destination Node through a Channel (strictly speaking one on each side). As the Channels on either side (or the OS-provided IPC mechanism) conspire to copy the handles across, the processes involved in the handle transfer are always implicit. This means that a low-privilege or sandboxed process can only send its own handles in a Message, and it‘s not possible to abuse this to acquire another process’s handles.
A NodeChannel wraps a Channel that communicates to and from another given Node. It implements all messaging to another specific Node, both relating to general messaging (see NodeChannel::OnEventMessage), as well as messaging relating to invitations and Port management. Since the NodeChannel is associated with a single given Node, the peer Node name is an implicit given in any incoming Message from the Channel.
The Channel takes care of maintaining and servicing a queue of Messages outgoing to the peer node, as well as reading and parsing the next incoming Message from the IPC channel. Depending on the platform and the Node topology, it may also take care of moving outgoing and incoming handles between the processes hosting the Nodes on either side of the Channel.
Note that on Windows, the Broker always takes care of handle copying, as the Broker will typically be the only process with sufficient privilege to copy handles. This means that any Message carrying handles is routed through the Broker on Windows.
An in-transit Message on an IPC channel will be serialized as a mojo::core::Channel::Message.
For user Messages, this will contain:
Message buffering in Mojo Core primarily occurs at two levels:
There is also transient buffering of Messages to a new Peer Node while introductions are in-flight. Finally, while a Port is in transport to different node, it buffers inbound data until the destination Node accepts the new Peer, at which time any buffered data is forwarded to the new Port in the destination Node.
Mojo Core does implement quotas on Port receiving queue Message number and byte size. If the receive length quota is exceeded on a Port, it signals an over-quota TrapEvent on the receiving Port. This doesn't however limit buffering as the caller needs to handle the TrapEvent in some way - most likely by simply closing the Port.
Since Mojo Core does not limit buffering, the producers and consumers in a process network must be balanced. If a producer runs wild, the producer‘s process may buffer an arbirarly large number of Messages (and bytes) in the outgoing Message queue on the IPC channel to the consumer’s Node. Alternatively the consumer‘s process may buffer an arbitrarily large number of Messages (and bytes) in the incoming Message queue on the consumer’s Port.
Mojo can be viewed as a Capability system, where a Port is a Capability. If a Node can name a Port, that Port can be considered a granted Capability to that Node. Many Ports will grant other Ports upon request, and so the transitive closure of those Ports can be considered in the set of granted Capabilities to a Node.
Native handles can also be viewed as Capabilities, and so any native handle reachable from the set of Ports granted to a Node can also be considered in the Node's set of granted Capabilities.
There‘s however a significant difference between Ports and native handles, in that native handles are kernel-mediated capabilities. This means there’s no way for a process that doesn't hold a handle to operate on it.
Mojo Ports, in contrast, are a pure user-mode construct and any Node can send any Message to any Port of any other Node so long as it has knowledge of the Port and Node names. If it doesn't already have an IPC channel to that node, it can either send the Message through the Broker, or request an invitation to the destination Node from the Broker and then send the Message directly.
It is therefore important not to leak Port names into Nodes that shouldn't be granted the corresponding Capability.