Since C++17, we no longer need to explicitly specify the type of the
mutex within the lock_guard. The type system can now deduce these with
deduction guides.
In some cases, our callbacks were using s64 as a parameter, and in other
cases, they were using an int, which is inconsistent.
To make all callbacks consistent, we can just use an s64 as the type for
late cycles, given it gets rid of the need to cast internally.
While we're at it, also resolve some signed/unsigned conversions that
were occurring related to the callback registration.
One behavior that we weren't handling properly in our heap allocation
process was the ability for the heap to be shrunk down in size if a
larger size was previously requested.
This adds the basic behavior to do so and also gets rid of HeapFree, as
it's no longer necessary now that we have allocations and deallocations
going through the same API function.
While we're at it, fully document the behavior that this function
performs.
Makes it more obvious that this function is intending to stand in for
the actual supervisor call itself, and not acting as a general heap
allocation function.
Also the following change will merge the freeing behavior of HeapFree
into this function, so leaving it as HeapAllocate would be misleading.
In cases where HeapAllocate is called with the same size of the current
heap, we can simply do nothing and return successfully.
This avoids doing work where we otherwise don't have to. This is also
what the kernel itself does in this scenario.
Another holdover from citra that can be tossed out is the notion of the
heap needing to be allocated in different addresses. On the switch, the
base address of the heap will always be managed by the memory allocator
in the kernel, so this doesn't need to be specified in the function's
interface itself.
The heap on the switch is always allocated with read/write permissions,
so we don't need to add specifying the memory permissions as part of the
heap allocation itself either.
This also corrects the error code returned from within the function.
If the size of the heap is larger than the entire heap region, then the
kernel will report an out of memory condition.
Makes it more evident that one is for actual code and one is for actual
data. Mutable and static are less than ideal terms here, because
read-only data is technically not mutable, but we were mapping it with
that label.
Given this is utilized by the loaders, this allows avoiding inclusion of
the kernel process definitions where avoidable.
This also keeps the loading format for all executable data separate from
the kernel objects.
Rather than make a global accessor for this sort of thing. We can make
it a part of the thread interface itself. This allows getting rid of a
hidden global accessor in the kernel code.
This condition was checking against the nominal thread priority, whereas
the kernel itself checks against the current priority instead. We were
also assigning the nominal priority, when we should be assigning
current_priority, which takes priority inheritance into account.
This can lead to the incorrect priority being assigned to a thread.
Given we recursively update the relevant threads, we don't need to go
through the whole mutex waiter list. This matches what the kernel does
as well (only accessing the first entry within the waiting list).
Makes it an instantiable class like it is in the actual kernel. This
will also allow removing reliance on global accessors in a following
change, now that we can encapsulate a reference to the system instance
in the class.
Within the kernel, shared memory and transfer memory facilities exist as
completely different kernel objects. They also have different validity
checking as well. Therefore, we shouldn't be treating the two as the
same kind of memory.
They also differ in terms of their behavioral aspect as well. Shared
memory is intended for sharing memory between processes, while transfer
memory is intended to be for transferring memory to other processes.
This breaks out the handling for transfer memory into its own class and
treats it as its own kernel object. This is also important when we
consider resource limits as well. Particularly because transfer memory
is limited by the resource limit value set for it.
While we currently don't handle resource limit testing against objects
yet (but we do allow setting them), this will make implementing that
behavior much easier in the future, as we don't need to distinguish
between shared memory and transfer memory allocations in the same place.
