374 lines
17 KiB
Markdown
374 lines
17 KiB
Markdown
---
|
|
title: "How Uber Uses Zig"
|
|
date: 2022-05-23T16:06:05+03:00
|
|
slug: how-uber-uses-zig
|
|
description: "I talked at the first Zig meetup in Milan about Uber's early experience with Zig: a little about how Uber uses Zig and more about my experience of bringing Zig to Uber, from both technical and social aspects."
|
|
---
|
|
|
|
Disclaimer: I work at Uber and am partially responsible for bringing `zig cc`
|
|
to serious internal use. Opinions are mine, this blog post is not affiliated
|
|
with Uber.
|
|
|
|
I talked at the [Zig Milan][zig-milan] meetup about "Onboarding Zig at Uber".
|
|
This post is a little about "how Uber uses Zig", and more about "my experience
|
|
of bringing Zig to Uber", from both technical and social aspects.
|
|
|
|
<big>The video is [here][milan-youtube]</big>. The rest of the post is a loose
|
|
transcript, with some commentary and errata.
|
|
|
|
{{<img src="_/2022/uber-zig-frank-tweet.jpg"
|
|
alt="My talk title, picture taken by @jedisct1"
|
|
caption="@mo_kelione is still my temporary twitter handle from 2009."
|
|
class="right"
|
|
half="true"
|
|
hint="photo"
|
|
>}}
|
|
|
|
TLDR:
|
|
|
|
* Uber uses Zig to compile its C/C++ code. Now only in the [Go
|
|
Monorepo][go-monorepo] via [bazel-zig-cc][bazel-zig-cc], with plans to
|
|
possibly expand use of `zig cc` to other languages that need a C/C++
|
|
toolchain.
|
|
* Main selling points of C/C++ toolchain on top of zig-cc over the
|
|
alternatives: configurable versions of glibc and macOS cross-compilation.
|
|
* Uber does not have any plans to use zig-the-language yet.
|
|
* Uber signed a support agreement with Zig Software Foundation (ZSF) to
|
|
prioritize bug fixes. The contract value is disclosed in the ZSF financial
|
|
reports.
|
|
* Thanks to my team, the Go Monorepo team, the Go Platform team, my director,
|
|
finance, legal, and of course Zig Software Foundation for making this
|
|
relationship happen. The relationship has been fruitful so far.
|
|
|
|
{{<div-clear>}}
|
|
|
|
## About Uber's tech stack
|
|
|
|
Uber started in 2010, has clocked over 15 billion trips, and made lots of cool
|
|
and innovative tech for it to happen. General-purpose "allowed" server-side
|
|
languages are Go and Java, with Python and Node allowed for specific use cases
|
|
(like front-end for Node and Python for data analysis/ML). C++ is used for a few
|
|
low level libraries. Use of other languages in back-end code is minimal.
|
|
|
|
Our Go Monorepo is larger than Linux kernel[^1], and worked on by a couple of
|
|
thousand engineers. In short, it's big.
|
|
|
|
## How does Uber use Zig?
|
|
|
|
{{<img src="_/2022/uber-zig-abg.png"
|
|
alt="Abhinav Gupta: we're using Zig's C toolchain only, not the language. It's not fully rolled out yet, but among other things, it'll enable cross compilation of C based code (as well as Go code that uses CGo). It'll drop the dependency on the system's C compiler."
|
|
caption="Abhinav's TLDR of the presentation."
|
|
class="right"
|
|
half="true"
|
|
hint="graph"
|
|
>}}
|
|
|
|
I can't say this better than my colleague [Abhinav Gupta][abg] from the Go
|
|
Platform team (a transcript is available in the "alt" attribute):
|
|
|
|
At this point of the presentation, since I explained (thanks abg!) how Uber
|
|
uses Zig, I could end the talk. But you all came in for the process, so after
|
|
an uncomfortable pause, I decided to tell more about it.
|
|
|
|
{{<div-clear>}}
|
|
|
|
## History
|
|
|
|
Pre-2018 Uber's Go services lived in their separate repositories. In 2018[^2]
|
|
services started moving to Go monorepo en masse. My team was among the first
|
|
wave --- I still remember the complexity.
|
|
|
|
### 2019: asks for a hermetic toolchain
|
|
|
|
At the time, the Go monorepo already used a hermetic Go toolchain. Therefore,
|
|
the Go compiler used to build the monorepo was unaffected by the compiler
|
|
installed on the system, if any. Therefore, on whichever environment a Go build
|
|
was running, it always used the same version of Go. Bazel docs [explain this
|
|
better than me][bazel-hermetic].
|
|
|
|
{{<img src="_/2022/uber-zig-gm-221.png"
|
|
alt="A Jira task asking for a hermetic C++ toolchain."
|
|
caption="This was created in 2019 and did not see much movement."
|
|
hint="graph"
|
|
>}}
|
|
|
|
A C++ toolchain is a collection of programs to compile C/C++ code. It is
|
|
unavoidable for some our Go code to use [CGo][cgo], so it needs a C/C++
|
|
compiler. Go then links the Go and C parts to the final executable.
|
|
|
|
The C++ toolchain was not hermetic since the start of Go monorepo: Bazel would
|
|
use whatever it found on the system. That meant Clang on macOS, GCC (whatever
|
|
version) on Linux. Setting up a hermetic C++ toolchain in Bazel is a lot of
|
|
work (think person-months for our monorepo), there was no immediate need, and
|
|
it also was not painful *enough* to be picked up.
|
|
|
|
At this point it is important to understand the limitations of a non-hermetic
|
|
C++ toolchain:
|
|
- Cannot cross-compile. So we can't compile Linux executables on a Mac if they
|
|
require CGo (which many of our services do). This was worked around by... not
|
|
cross-compiling.
|
|
- CGo executables would link to a glibc version that was found on the system.
|
|
That means: when upgrading the OS (multi-month effort), the build fleet must
|
|
be upgraded last. Otherwise, if build host runs a newer glibc than a
|
|
production host, the resulting binary will link against a newer glibc
|
|
version, which is incompatible to the old one still on a production host.
|
|
- We couldn't use new compilers, which have better optimizations, because we
|
|
were running an older OS on the build fleet (backporting only the compiler,
|
|
but not glibc, carries it's own risks).
|
|
- Official binaries for newer versions of Go are built against a more recent
|
|
version of GCC than some of our build machines. We had to work around this by
|
|
compiling Go from source on these machines.
|
|
|
|
All of these issues were annoying, but not enough to invest into the toolchain.
|
|
|
|
### 2020 Dec: need musl
|
|
|
|
I was working on a non-Uber-related toy project that is built with Bazel and
|
|
uses CGo. I wanted my binary to be static, but Bazel does not make that easy. I
|
|
spent a couple of evenings creating a Bazel toolchain on top of
|
|
[musl.cc](https://musl.cc), but didn't go far, because at the time I wasn't
|
|
able to make sense out of the Bazel's toolchain documentation, and I didn't
|
|
find a good example to rely on.
|
|
|
|
### 2021 Jan: discovering `zig cc`
|
|
|
|
In January of 2021 I found Andrew Kelley's blog post [`zig cc`: a Powerful
|
|
Drop-In Replacement for GCC/Clang][zig-cc-andrewrk]. I recommend reading the
|
|
article; it changed how I think about compilers (and it will help you
|
|
understand the remaining article better, because I gave the talk to a Zig
|
|
audience). To sum up the Andrew's article, `zig cc` has the following
|
|
advantages:
|
|
|
|
- Fully hermetic C/C++ compiler in ~40MB tarball. This is an order of magnitude
|
|
smaller than the standard Clang distributions.
|
|
- Can link against a glibc version that was provided as a command-line argument
|
|
(e.g. `-target x86_64-linux-gnu.2.28` will compile for x86_64 Linux and link
|
|
against glibc 2.28).
|
|
- Host and target are decoupled. The setup is the same for both `linux-aarch64`
|
|
and `darwin-x86_64` targets, regardless of the host.
|
|
- Linking with musl is "just a different libc version": `-target
|
|
x86_64-linux-musl`.
|
|
|
|
I started messing around with `zig cc`. I compiled random programs, reported
|
|
issues. I thought about making this a [bazel toolchain][bazel-toolchain], but
|
|
there were quite a few blocking bugs or missing features. One of them was lack
|
|
of `zig ar`, which Bazel relies on.
|
|
|
|
### 2021 Feb: asking for attention
|
|
|
|
I [reported bugs][zig-motiejus-issues] to Zig. Nothing happened for a
|
|
week. I donated $50/month, expecting "the Zig folks" to prioritize what I've
|
|
reported. A week of silence again. And then I dropped the bomb in
|
|
`#zig:libera.chat`:
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
<motiejus> What is the protocol to "claim" the dev hours once donated?
|
|
<andrewrk> ZSF only accepts no-strings-attached donations
|
|
<andrewrk> did you get a different impression somewhere?
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
Oops. At the time I hoped that whoever notice the conversation would immediately
|
|
forget it. Well, here it is again, more than a year later, over here, for your
|
|
enjoyment.
|
|
|
|
### 2021 June: bazel-zig-cc and Uber's Go monorepo
|
|
|
|
In June of 2021 [Adam Bouhenguel][ajbouh] created a [working bazel-zig-cc
|
|
prototype][ajbouh/bazel-zig-cc]. The basics worked, but it still lacked some
|
|
features. Andrew later implemented `zig ar`[^3], which was the last missing
|
|
piece to a truly workable bazel-zig-cc. I integrated `zig ar`, polished the
|
|
documentation and [announced my fork of bazel-zig-cc to the Zig mailing
|
|
list][bazel-zig-cc-ga]. At this point it was usable for my toy project. Win!
|
|
|
|
A few weeks after the announcement I created a "WIP DIFF" for Uber's Go
|
|
monorepo: just used my onboarding instructions and naïvely submitted it to our
|
|
CI. It failed almost all tests.
|
|
|
|
{{<img src="_/2022/uber-zig-zcc-gocode.png"
|
|
alt="A diff titled \"zig c++ toolchain\". Started in July 1, 2021"
|
|
caption="Onboarding bazel-zig-cc to Uber's Go monorepo."
|
|
hint="graph"
|
|
class="right"
|
|
half="true"
|
|
>}}
|
|
|
|
Most of the failures were caused by dependencies on system libraries. At this
|
|
point it was clear that, to truly onboard bazel-zig-cc and compile **all** it's
|
|
C/C++ code, there needs to be quite a lot of investment to remove the
|
|
dependency on system libraries and undoing of a lot of technical debt.
|
|
|
|
### 2021 End: recap
|
|
|
|
- Various places at Uber would benefit from a hermetic C++ cross-compiler, but
|
|
it's not funded due to requiring a large investment and not naving enough
|
|
justification.
|
|
- bazel-zig-cc kinda works, but both bazel-zig-cc and zig cc have known bugs.
|
|
- I can't realistically implement the necessary changes or bug fixes. I tried
|
|
implementing `zig ar`, a trivial front-end for LLVM's `ar`, and failed.
|
|
- Once an issue had been identified as a Zig issue, getting attention from Zig
|
|
developers was unpredictable. Some issues got resolved within days, some took
|
|
more than 6 months, and donations din't change `zig cc` priorities.
|
|
- The monorepo-onboarding diff was simmering and waiting for it's time.
|
|
|
|
### 2021 End: Uber needs a cross-compiler
|
|
|
|
I was tasked to evaluate arm64 for Uber. Evaluation details aside, I needed to
|
|
compile software for linux-arm64. Lots of it! Since most of our low-level infra
|
|
is in the Go monorepo, I needed a cross-compiler there first.
|
|
|
|
A business reason for a cross-compiler landed on my lap. Now now both time and
|
|
money can be invested there. Having a "WIP diff" with `zig cc` was a good
|
|
start, but was still very far from over: teams were not convinced it was the
|
|
right thing to do, the diff was too much of a prototype, and both zig-cc and
|
|
bazel-zig-cc needed lots of work before they could be used at any capacity at
|
|
Uber.
|
|
|
|
When onboarding such a technology in a large corporation, the most important
|
|
thing to manage is risk. As Zig is a novel technology (not even 1.0!), it was
|
|
truly unusual to suggest compiling all of our C and C++ code with it. We should
|
|
be planning to stick with it for at least a decade. Questions were raised and
|
|
evaluated with great care and scrutiny. For that I am truly grateful to the Go
|
|
Monorepo team, especially [Ken Micklas][kmicklas], for doing the work and
|
|
research on this unproven prototype.
|
|
|
|
### Evaluation of different compilers
|
|
|
|
Given that we now needed a cross-compiler, we had two candidates:
|
|
|
|
- [grailbio/bazel-toolchain][grailbio/bazel-toolchain]. Uses a vanilla Clang.
|
|
No risk. Well understood. Obviously safe and correct solution.
|
|
- [~motiejus/bazel-zig-cc][bazel-zig-cc]: uses `zig cc`. Buggy, risky, unsafe,
|
|
uncertain, used-by-nobody, but quite a tempting solution.
|
|
|
|
`zig cc` provides a few extra features on top of `bazel-toolchain`:
|
|
- configurable glibc version. With `grailbio` you would need a sysroot
|
|
(basically, a chroot with the system libraries, so the programs can be linked
|
|
against them), which would need to be maintained.
|
|
- a working, albeit still buggy, hermetic (cross-)compiler for macOS.
|
|
|
|
We would be able to handle glibc with either, however, `grailbio` is unlikely
|
|
to ever have a way to compile to macOS, let alone cross-compile. Relying on the
|
|
system compiler is undesirable on developer laptops, and the Go Platform feels
|
|
that first-hand, especially during macOS upgrades.
|
|
|
|
The prospect of a hermetic toolchain for macOS targets tipped the scales
|
|
towards `zig cc`, with all its warts, risks and instability.
|
|
|
|
There was still another problem, one of attention: if we were considering the
|
|
use of Zig in a serious capacity, we knew we will hit problems, but would be
|
|
unlikely to have the expertise to solve them. How can we, as a BigCorp, de-risk
|
|
the engagement question, making sure that bugs important to us are handled
|
|
timely? We were sure of good intentions of ZSF: it was obvious that, if we find
|
|
and report a legitimate bug, it would get fixed. But how can we put an upper
|
|
bound on latency?
|
|
|
|
### Money
|
|
|
|
$50 donation does not help, perhaps a large service contract would? I asked
|
|
around if we could spend some money to de-risk our "cross-compiler". Getting a
|
|
green light from the management took about 10 minutes; drafting, approving and
|
|
signing the contract took about 2 months.
|
|
|
|
Contract terms were roughly as follows:
|
|
- Uber reports issues to github.com/ziglang/zig and pings Loris.
|
|
- Loris assigns it to someone in ZSF.
|
|
- Hack hack hack hack hack.
|
|
- When done, Loris enters the number of hours worked on the issue.
|
|
|
|
Uber has a right to ZSF members' *time*. We have no decision or voting power
|
|
whatsoever with regards to Zig. We have right to offer suggestions, but they
|
|
have been and will be treated just like from any other third-party bystander.
|
|
We did not ask for special rights, it's explicit in the contract, and we don't
|
|
want that.
|
|
|
|
The contract was signed, the wire transfer completed, and in 2022 January we
|
|
had:
|
|
|
|
- A service contract with ZSF that promised to prioritize issues that we've
|
|
registered.
|
|
- A commitment from Go Platform team to make our C++ toolchain cross-compiling
|
|
and hermetic.
|
|
|
|
{{<img src="_/2022/uber-zig-deposit.png"
|
|
alt="Wire of $52800 from Uber to Zig Software Foundation"
|
|
caption="The amount of money that changed hands is public, because ZSF is a nonprofit."
|
|
hint="graph"
|
|
>}}
|
|
|
|
## 2022 and beyond
|
|
|
|
In Feb 2022 the toolchain was gated behind a command-line flag
|
|
(`--config=hermetic-cc`). As of Feb 2022, you can invoke `zig cc` in Uber's Go
|
|
Monorepo without requiring a custom patch.
|
|
|
|
{{<img src="_/2022/uber-zig-landed.png"
|
|
alt="WIP DIFF onboarding the monorepo was landed"
|
|
caption="Proof of our submitqueue landed my WIP DIFF."
|
|
hint="graph"
|
|
>}}
|
|
|
|
Timeline of 2022 so far:
|
|
|
|
- In April, around my talk in Milan, we shipped the first Debian package
|
|
compiled with zig-cc to production.
|
|
- In May we have enabled `zig cc` for all our Debian packages.
|
|
- In H2 we expect to compile all our cgo code with `zig cc` and make
|
|
the `--config=hermetic-cc` a default.
|
|
- In H2 we expect to move [bazel-zig-cc][bazel-zig-cc] under github.com/uber.
|
|
|
|
We have opened a number of issues to Zig, and, as of writing, all of them have
|
|
been resolved. Some were handled by ZSF alone, some were more involved and
|
|
required collaboration between ZSF, Uber and Go developers.
|
|
|
|
## Summary
|
|
|
|
I started preparing for the presentation hoping I can give "a runbook" how to
|
|
adopt Zig at a big company. However, there is no runbook; my effort to onboard
|
|
zig-cc could have failed due to many many reasons.
|
|
|
|
Looking back, I think the most important reasons for success is a killer
|
|
feature at the right time. In our case, there were two: glibc version selection
|
|
without a sysroot and cross-compiling to macOS.
|
|
|
|
## Appendix
|
|
|
|
I forgot to flip to the last slide in the presentation. Here it is:
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
```
|
|
|
|
If compilers or adopting software for other CPU architectures (and/or living in
|
|
the Eastern Europe) is your thing, my team in Vilnius is hiring. Also, my
|
|
sister teams in Seattle and Bay Area are hiring too. Ping me.
|
|
|
|
Credits
|
|
-------
|
|
|
|
Many thanks Abhinav Gupta, Loris Cro and Ken Micklas for reading drafts of
|
|
this.
|
|
|
|
[^1]: Errata: I incorrectly said "by an order of magnitude". The order of
|
|
magnitude is the same.
|
|
[^2]: Errata: I said Go was the first monorepo. Go was 4'th.
|
|
[^3]: Errata: I said Jakub implemented `zig ar`. Correction: Andrew
|
|
implemented, Jakub reviewed.
|
|
|
|
[zig-milan]: https://zig.news/kristoff/zig-milan-party-2022-final-info-schedule-1jc1
|
|
[abg]: https://abhinavg.net/
|
|
[go-monorepo]: https://eng.uber.com/go-monorepo-bazel/
|
|
[bazel-zig-cc]: https://sr.ht/~motiejus/bazel-zig-cc/
|
|
[cgo]: https://godocs.io/cmd/cgo
|
|
[zig-cc-andrewrk]: https://andrewkelley.me/post/zig-cc-powerful-drop-in-replacement-gcc-clang.html
|
|
[bazel-toolchain]: https://bazel.build/docs/toolchains
|
|
[ajbouh]: https://github.com/ajbouh/
|
|
[ajbouh/bazel-zig-cc]: https://github.com/ajbouh/bazel-zig-cc/
|
|
[bazel-zig-cc-ga]: https://lists.sr.ht/~andrewrk/ziglang/%3C20210811104907.qahogqbdjs4trihn%40mtpad.i.jakstys.lt%3E
|
|
[grailbio/bazel-toolchain]: https://github.com/grailbio/bazel-toolchain
|
|
[milan-youtube]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SCj2J3HcEfc
|
|
[zig-motiejus-issues]: https://github.com/ziglang/zig/issues?q=author%3Amotiejus+sort%3Acreated-asc
|
|
[kmicklas]: https://github.com/kmicklas
|
|
[bazel-hermetic]: https://bazel.build/concepts/hermeticity
|