Owing to its historic roots as a derivative of the original Berkeley Systems Distribution (BSD), OpenBSD includes a great deal of old code. Many files bear copyright notices from the year 1980, and in some cases, even older. Although not explicitly stated as a project goal, keeping OpenBSD modern is an important part of satisfying other goals, such as portability and correctness.
To that end, something must be done about all the legacy code that we have inherited. Actually, two somethings, pruning and polishing. In this paper, I'll explain what I mean by these terms, how the OpenBSD Project goes about pruning and polishing, and lessons learned in the process.
Simply put, pruning is deleting code. I use the term pruning to encompass more than just the simple act of deleting code, but also the process of identifying which code should be. Some legacy code is useful; some is not.
Opinions vary as to the costs associated with keeping legacy code. At the low end, there is the argument that if it's not in the way, there's no harm. At the high end, Knight Capital went bankrupt after losing $400 million in 45 minutes after eight year old deactivated code was accidentally reactivated. Realistically, typical costs are in most cases closer to the low end.
Merely having old code in the source tree does imply that it is potentially in the way. The old code is still fetched during source checkouts, and if enabled, still takes time to compile. These costs are minimal in isolation, but when multiplied by the frequency with such activities take place, take their toll.
More importantly, many developer operations take place across the entire tree. For instance, as will be discussed further in the polishing section, a developer may run a tree wide grep for a particular programming idiom that has recently been determined to be harmful. Each result must be inspected and corrected. While theoretically possible to ignore, at least temporarily, results in legacy code, that is in itself another decision that must be made. Additionally, postponement mostly serves to obfuscate when a task is completed. It is important that the question, Are we done?, have a definitive answer.
Examples of tree wide changes include changing internal kernel interfaces. One example is the introduction of ALTQ, which added a new macro IFQ_ENQUEUE in parallel with the existing macro IF_ENQUEUE. More recently, ether_input has been replaced by if_input. Completing such changes requires modifying every network driver. But with hundreds of drivers to modify, more frequently what happens is that some drivers, those for which developers have access to hardware, receive updates while drivers for older hardware that has fallen out of use remain untouched. This leads to a fragmented API in the kernel, where old and new APIs exist side by side. Multiple APIs is a common and well tested transition strategy, but as the transition drags on and on, the existence of the old API becomes a source of confusion. Network drivers are often ported from FreeBSD or NetBSD, which may continue using the traditional API. When such code is ported to OpenBSD, it continues to work, but fails to take advantage of the new API. In this way, the continued existence of old code hampers the introduction of new code.
A second example are the simplelock locks once prevalent in the kernel. These locks, which were really macros which expanded to nothing, were introduced long before the kernel was actually capable of multiprocessor operation in a case of premature optimism. When SMP support was finally added, intervening code changes meant that many of the lock and unlock operations were incorrectly placed. In other cases, new developers were not always aware that the locks were empty macros and would attempt to use them in code which required functioning locks. Considerable developer effort was expended moving the locks around and trying to maintain the comments describing the necessary locking protocols in code which had never been tested. Arguments in favor of keeping the simplelocks were that they served as a guide to where real locks should one day be introduced. However, it was becoming increasing clear over time that any attempt at correct locking would be better off ignoring the simplelocks and starting fresh from first principles. Finally, the simplelocks were deleted entirely from the tree.
Determining what code can safely be deleted is an important part of the pruning process. The obvious approach would be to ask a representative group, such as the user mailing list, if anybody is using the code in question. This frequently results in false positives, however. Any question about whether anyone is using a particular ISA network adapter will reveal that somebody has a 486 with such an adapter in it in their garage. It hasn't been turned on in three years, but now that the question has been asked, maybe they think they will. In general, the people who do not have to actually maintain ancient drivers appear much more optimistic about their future utility. (Also, human memory is far from infallible, and it frequently turns out the 486 in the garage did not have the adapter in question. After all these years, who can remember whether their 3COM ISA adapter was supported by ec, ef, eg, el, or ep?)
A better approach is to confer with a smaller group of developers, particularly those interested in maintaining support for older systems, and ask them about the current availability of such hardware. A quick search of the second hand market, such as eBay, can also help identify whether such support is likely to be useful in the future. Low end testing has been helpful in many instances, so the goal is not to relegate all 486 era hardware to the scrap heap. Rather, it is to identify the 486 era hardware that is available to the vintage enthusiast seeking to assemble a working system today.
Failing hardware may even cause entire architectures to become unsupported. Long before flooding in Thailand resulted in a shortage of multi-terabyte drives, the OpenBSD project suffered from a shortage of adequate 50-pin SCSI drives. Interest in m68k platforms was already waning due to a lack of upstream toolchain support and the limited performance of the platform, but after all the known working systems suffered hard drive failures, it was finally time to retire the port and send its code to the attic.
Userland code is also subject to pruning. In the early days of BSD, the CSRG was a small group of developers with similar needs. If a program were useful to them, it would be included in the source tree as a matter of course. Thirty years later, however, the typical OpenBSD user does not need to reformat Fortran source code for printing.
In some cases, the removed functionality may still be useful, but has been subsumed by better features elsewhere. TCP wrappers was still included long after most users probably migrated to pf for network access control. Wrappers had also fallen out of favor with new developers. So for example, while one could use hosts.deny with sshd, it wouldn't work with nginx. Where possible, such inconsistencies should be avoided. pf works consistently with more servers, and so TCP wrappers were removed.
In other cases, the removed program has fallen victim to changing project priorities. In the early years of the project, the ports tree was not as fully developed, making it more difficult to assemble third party software. The set of programs that constituted a complete unix system was also smaller. In the 90s, an OpenBSD server with sendmail and popa3d was all that a small company or ISP may need to provide email access. In the decades since, the POP protocol has faded in popularity compared to IMAP and more recently webmail. The necessary components and dependencies are too great to provide a simple out of the box experience, however. Reevaluation of situation revealed that OpenBSD was, by contemporary standards, no longer a complete mail server solution, but merely a complete POP mail server solution. As the POP server niche shrank, it was no longer compelling for OpenBSD to continue to provide POP service, and the popa3d daemon was removed.
Note that removing a program from base doesn't entirely end its availability. Many removed programs find an afterlife in the ports tree.
Occasionally the delete first, ask questions later technique has caused problems. One notable example is the rmail program. A remnant of the long gone UUCP support, it was deleted without notice under the assumption that nobody could possibly be using it. Immediately after deletion, however, an OpenBSD developer remarked that he did in fact use rmail (but without UUCP) as part of his usual email fetching pipeline. Nevertheless, it was determined that ports was a better home for rmail, but some disruption and stress could have been avoided with advance notice.
Keeping the code that's left up to date with modern development practices is an important part of OpenBSD's mission to deliver a quality operating system. While 80s developers were certainly aware of security vulnerabilities, the danger of many programming constructs was not fully realized at the time. As time passes, categories of vulnerability wax and wane in popularity. In response, OpenBSD developers adapt their code style to avoid unsafe idioms and prefer safer ones, and to replace dangerous functions with safer variants.
The strlcpy and strlcat functions were introduced early in the OpenBSD Project's history in response to perhaps the most prominent of C's vulnerabilities. High priority code such as ssh was reworked to use these functions first, followed by a broader audit. The OpenBSD base tree, minus certain third party components, has now been completely free from plain strcpy and strcat calls for several years.
The strtonum function was introduced after it was observed that many userland programs handled numeric command line arguments poorly. The predominant function, atoi, will happily accept garbage leading to unexpected results when a simple typo is processed. The standard replacement function, strtol, makes it possible to perform error checking, however the tedium of doing so meant that it was rarely used in practice. Developers would prefer to close their eyes and use atoi than write out all the necessary code for proper strtol use. There are now approximately 550 calls to strtonum in OpenBSD.
Although integer overflows can occur in many contexts, they are particularly likely to occur and particularly devastating when associated with memory allocation. Correct overflow checking in C is made difficult by the fact that many naive attempts will result in undefined behavior, rendering them moot and subject to compiler optimizer elimination. Initially, the OpenBSD policy was to identify and replace problematic allocations with the standard calloc function. Unfortunately, this function incurred the additional cost of zeroing memory unnecessarily and also lacked the flexibility needed to replace realloc. A new function, reallocarray, was introduced that solves both problems. Originally introduced to assist in checking overflows in LibreSSL, it's usage quickly spread throughout the tree, and there are now approximately 650 reallocarray calls in the tree, plus an additional 250 mallocarray calls in the kernel.
Another polishing effort is refactoring of header files. Over time, header files inevitably accumulate more and more declarations, often becoming entangled in circular dependencies. Eventually the set of header files necessary to compile a file can no longer be inferred from the source, and developers simply copy and paste known working sets of headers from one file to another. The immediate downside of this is that even minor changes to any header require rebuilding the entire kernel. The long term downside is that once entangled, source files only become more tightly bound, making it harder to reverse the trend. There are no simple procedures here, but judicious use of forward declarations and opaque types can reduce the coupling between headers.
A side effect of the polishing effort is homogenization. The original BSD code base had only a few authors, and thanks to the KNF style guidelines, a very consistent look and feel throughout. Over time, new code is added from various sources, which is not always entirely consistent. However, the polishing effort smooths out many of those differences, restoring consistency. Consistency throughout the code enables existing developers and newcomers alike to quickly familiarize themselves with any part of the tree and begin hacking.
The games directory deserves special mention. It's filled with some of the oldest code in OpenBSD, and unlike most of the source tree, was collected from a variety of sources outside the original CSRG. As a result, the code in games has an eclectic mix of styles. Many of the games programs are of questionable utility. It would seem this directory would be the ideal target for some relentless pruning, but it's not. The games directory is instead something of a proving ground for polishing techniques.
The variation in style in games means it is more representative of code outside OpenBSD, such as that found in the ports tree. But unlike the ports tree it is still under full OpenBSD control. And so, for example, when Theo undertook a project to eradicate deterministic random from libc, the games directory was one of the first places he looked. Nearly all calls to random in main source tree had long since been converted to use arc4random. Some games, however, save random seeds in game save files and want to restore them later, making them useful tests for the new srand_deterministic function.
Hopefully the reader has gained some insight into the OpenBSD development process, especially with regard to the pruning and polishing process. Keeping the source code modern helps us to deliver quality releases, and also makes hacking fun.