+2016-01-13 Torvald Riegel <triegel@redhat.com>
+
+ * nptl/descr.h (ENQUEUE_MUTEX_BOTH, DEQUEUE_MUTEX): Add compiler
+ barriers and comments.
+ * nptl/pthread_mutex_lock.c (__pthread_mutex_lock_full): Likewise.
+ * nptl/pthread_mutex_timedlock.c (pthread_mutex_timedlock): Likewise.
+ * nptl/pthread_mutex_unlock.c (__pthread_mutex_unlock_full): Likewise.
+
2016-01-13 Torvald Riegel <triegel@redhat.com>
[BZ #19402]
but the pointer to the next/previous element of the list points
in the middle of the object, the __next element. Whenever
casting to __pthread_list_t we need to adjust the pointer
- first. */
+ first.
+ These operations are effectively concurrent code in that the thread
+ can get killed at any point in time and the kernel takes over. Thus,
+ the __next elements are a kind of concurrent list and we need to
+ enforce using compiler barriers that the individual operations happen
+ in such a way that the kernel always sees a consistent list. The
+ backward links (ie, the __prev elements) are not used by the kernel.
+ FIXME We should use relaxed MO atomic operations here and signal fences
+ because this kind of concurrency is similar to synchronizing with a
+ signal handler. */
# define QUEUE_PTR_ADJUST (offsetof (__pthread_list_t, __next))
# define ENQUEUE_MUTEX_BOTH(mutex, val) \
mutex->__data.__list.__next = THREAD_GETMEM (THREAD_SELF, \
robust_head.list); \
mutex->__data.__list.__prev = (void *) &THREAD_SELF->robust_head; \
+ /* Ensure that the new list entry is ready before we insert it. */ \
+ __asm ("" ::: "memory"); \
THREAD_SETMEM (THREAD_SELF, robust_head.list, \
(void *) (((uintptr_t) &mutex->__data.__list.__next) \
| val)); \
((char *) (((uintptr_t) mutex->__data.__list.__prev) & ~1ul) \
- QUEUE_PTR_ADJUST); \
prev->__next = mutex->__data.__list.__next; \
+ /* Ensure that we remove the entry from the list before we change the \
+ __next pointer of the entry, which is read by the kernel. */ \
+ __asm ("" ::: "memory"); \
mutex->__data.__list.__prev = NULL; \
mutex->__data.__list.__next = NULL; \
} while (0)
do { \
mutex->__data.__list.__next \
= THREAD_GETMEM (THREAD_SELF, robust_list.__next); \
+ /* Ensure that the new list entry is ready before we insert it. */ \
+ __asm ("" ::: "memory"); \
THREAD_SETMEM (THREAD_SELF, robust_list.__next, \
(void *) (((uintptr_t) &mutex->__data.__list) | val)); \
} while (0)
} \
\
runp->__next = next->__next; \
+ /* Ensure that we remove the entry from the list before we change the \
+ __next pointer of the entry, which is read by the kernel. */ \
+ __asm ("" ::: "memory"); \
mutex->__data.__list.__next = NULL; \
} \
} while (0)
case PTHREAD_MUTEX_ROBUST_ADAPTIVE_NP:
THREAD_SETMEM (THREAD_SELF, robust_head.list_op_pending,
&mutex->__data.__list.__next);
+ /* We need to set op_pending before starting the operation. Also
+ see comments at ENQUEUE_MUTEX. */
+ __asm ("" ::: "memory");
oldval = mutex->__data.__lock;
/* This is set to FUTEX_WAITERS iff we might have shared the
/* But it is inconsistent unless marked otherwise. */
mutex->__data.__owner = PTHREAD_MUTEX_INCONSISTENT;
+ /* We must not enqueue the mutex before we have acquired it.
+ Also see comments at ENQUEUE_MUTEX. */
+ __asm ("" ::: "memory");
ENQUEUE_MUTEX (mutex);
+ /* We need to clear op_pending after we enqueue the mutex. */
+ __asm ("" ::: "memory");
THREAD_SETMEM (THREAD_SELF, robust_head.list_op_pending, NULL);
/* Note that we deliberately exit here. If we fall
int kind = PTHREAD_MUTEX_TYPE (mutex);
if (kind == PTHREAD_MUTEX_ROBUST_ERRORCHECK_NP)
{
+ /* We do not need to ensure ordering wrt another memory
+ access. Also see comments at ENQUEUE_MUTEX. */
THREAD_SETMEM (THREAD_SELF, robust_head.list_op_pending,
NULL);
return EDEADLK;
if (kind == PTHREAD_MUTEX_ROBUST_RECURSIVE_NP)
{
+ /* We do not need to ensure ordering wrt another memory
+ access. */
THREAD_SETMEM (THREAD_SELF, robust_head.list_op_pending,
NULL);
mutex->__data.__count = 0;
int private = PTHREAD_ROBUST_MUTEX_PSHARED (mutex);
lll_unlock (mutex->__data.__lock, private);
+ /* FIXME This violates the mutex destruction requirements. See
+ __pthread_mutex_unlock_full. */
THREAD_SETMEM (THREAD_SELF, robust_head.list_op_pending, NULL);
return ENOTRECOVERABLE;
}
mutex->__data.__count = 1;
+ /* We must not enqueue the mutex before we have acquired it.
+ Also see comments at ENQUEUE_MUTEX. */
+ __asm ("" ::: "memory");
ENQUEUE_MUTEX (mutex);
+ /* We need to clear op_pending after we enqueue the mutex. */
+ __asm ("" ::: "memory");
THREAD_SETMEM (THREAD_SELF, robust_head.list_op_pending, NULL);
break;
int robust = mutex->__data.__kind & PTHREAD_MUTEX_ROBUST_NORMAL_NP;
if (robust)
- /* Note: robust PI futexes are signaled by setting bit 0. */
- THREAD_SETMEM (THREAD_SELF, robust_head.list_op_pending,
- (void *) (((uintptr_t) &mutex->__data.__list.__next)
- | 1));
+ {
+ /* Note: robust PI futexes are signaled by setting bit 0. */
+ THREAD_SETMEM (THREAD_SELF, robust_head.list_op_pending,
+ (void *) (((uintptr_t) &mutex->__data.__list.__next)
+ | 1));
+ /* We need to set op_pending before starting the operation. Also
+ see comments at ENQUEUE_MUTEX. */
+ __asm ("" ::: "memory");
+ }
oldval = mutex->__data.__lock;
{
if (kind == PTHREAD_MUTEX_ERRORCHECK_NP)
{
+ /* We do not need to ensure ordering wrt another memory
+ access. */
THREAD_SETMEM (THREAD_SELF, robust_head.list_op_pending, NULL);
return EDEADLK;
}
if (kind == PTHREAD_MUTEX_RECURSIVE_NP)
{
+ /* We do not need to ensure ordering wrt another memory
+ access. */
THREAD_SETMEM (THREAD_SELF, robust_head.list_op_pending, NULL);
/* Just bump the counter. */
/* But it is inconsistent unless marked otherwise. */
mutex->__data.__owner = PTHREAD_MUTEX_INCONSISTENT;
+ /* We must not enqueue the mutex before we have acquired it.
+ Also see comments at ENQUEUE_MUTEX. */
+ __asm ("" ::: "memory");
ENQUEUE_MUTEX_PI (mutex);
+ /* We need to clear op_pending after we enqueue the mutex. */
+ __asm ("" ::: "memory");
THREAD_SETMEM (THREAD_SELF, robust_head.list_op_pending, NULL);
/* Note that we deliberately exit here. If we fall
PTHREAD_ROBUST_MUTEX_PSHARED (mutex)),
0, 0);
+ /* To the kernel, this will be visible after the kernel has
+ acquired the mutex in the syscall. */
THREAD_SETMEM (THREAD_SELF, robust_head.list_op_pending, NULL);
return ENOTRECOVERABLE;
}
mutex->__data.__count = 1;
if (robust)
{
+ /* We must not enqueue the mutex before we have acquired it.
+ Also see comments at ENQUEUE_MUTEX. */
+ __asm ("" ::: "memory");
ENQUEUE_MUTEX_PI (mutex);
+ /* We need to clear op_pending after we enqueue the mutex. */
+ __asm ("" ::: "memory");
THREAD_SETMEM (THREAD_SELF, robust_head.list_op_pending, NULL);
}
}
case PTHREAD_MUTEX_ROBUST_ADAPTIVE_NP:
THREAD_SETMEM (THREAD_SELF, robust_head.list_op_pending,
&mutex->__data.__list.__next);
+ /* We need to set op_pending before starting the operation. Also
+ see comments at ENQUEUE_MUTEX. */
+ __asm ("" ::: "memory");
oldval = mutex->__data.__lock;
/* This is set to FUTEX_WAITERS iff we might have shared the
/* But it is inconsistent unless marked otherwise. */
mutex->__data.__owner = PTHREAD_MUTEX_INCONSISTENT;
+ /* We must not enqueue the mutex before we have acquired it.
+ Also see comments at ENQUEUE_MUTEX. */
+ __asm ("" ::: "memory");
ENQUEUE_MUTEX (mutex);
+ /* We need to clear op_pending after we enqueue the mutex. */
+ __asm ("" ::: "memory");
THREAD_SETMEM (THREAD_SELF, robust_head.list_op_pending, NULL);
/* Note that we deliberately exit here. If we fall
int kind = PTHREAD_MUTEX_TYPE (mutex);
if (kind == PTHREAD_MUTEX_ROBUST_ERRORCHECK_NP)
{
+ /* We do not need to ensure ordering wrt another memory
+ access. Also see comments at ENQUEUE_MUTEX. */
THREAD_SETMEM (THREAD_SELF, robust_head.list_op_pending,
NULL);
return EDEADLK;
if (kind == PTHREAD_MUTEX_ROBUST_RECURSIVE_NP)
{
+ /* We do not need to ensure ordering wrt another memory
+ access. */
THREAD_SETMEM (THREAD_SELF, robust_head.list_op_pending,
NULL);
mutex->__data.__count = 0;
int private = PTHREAD_ROBUST_MUTEX_PSHARED (mutex);
lll_unlock (mutex->__data.__lock, private);
+ /* FIXME This violates the mutex destruction requirements. See
+ __pthread_mutex_unlock_full. */
THREAD_SETMEM (THREAD_SELF, robust_head.list_op_pending, NULL);
return ENOTRECOVERABLE;
}
mutex->__data.__count = 1;
+ /* We must not enqueue the mutex before we have acquired it.
+ Also see comments at ENQUEUE_MUTEX. */
+ __asm ("" ::: "memory");
ENQUEUE_MUTEX (mutex);
+ /* We need to clear op_pending after we enqueue the mutex. */
+ __asm ("" ::: "memory");
THREAD_SETMEM (THREAD_SELF, robust_head.list_op_pending, NULL);
break;
int robust = mutex->__data.__kind & PTHREAD_MUTEX_ROBUST_NORMAL_NP;
if (robust)
- /* Note: robust PI futexes are signaled by setting bit 0. */
- THREAD_SETMEM (THREAD_SELF, robust_head.list_op_pending,
- (void *) (((uintptr_t) &mutex->__data.__list.__next)
- | 1));
+ {
+ /* Note: robust PI futexes are signaled by setting bit 0. */
+ THREAD_SETMEM (THREAD_SELF, robust_head.list_op_pending,
+ (void *) (((uintptr_t) &mutex->__data.__list.__next)
+ | 1));
+ /* We need to set op_pending before starting the operation. Also
+ see comments at ENQUEUE_MUTEX. */
+ __asm ("" ::: "memory");
+ }
oldval = mutex->__data.__lock;
{
if (kind == PTHREAD_MUTEX_ERRORCHECK_NP)
{
+ /* We do not need to ensure ordering wrt another memory
+ access. */
THREAD_SETMEM (THREAD_SELF, robust_head.list_op_pending, NULL);
return EDEADLK;
}
if (kind == PTHREAD_MUTEX_RECURSIVE_NP)
{
+ /* We do not need to ensure ordering wrt another memory
+ access. */
THREAD_SETMEM (THREAD_SELF, robust_head.list_op_pending, NULL);
/* Just bump the counter. */
/* But it is inconsistent unless marked otherwise. */
mutex->__data.__owner = PTHREAD_MUTEX_INCONSISTENT;
+ /* We must not enqueue the mutex before we have acquired it.
+ Also see comments at ENQUEUE_MUTEX. */
+ __asm ("" ::: "memory");
ENQUEUE_MUTEX_PI (mutex);
+ /* We need to clear op_pending after we enqueue the mutex. */
+ __asm ("" ::: "memory");
THREAD_SETMEM (THREAD_SELF, robust_head.list_op_pending, NULL);
/* Note that we deliberately exit here. If we fall
PTHREAD_ROBUST_MUTEX_PSHARED (mutex)),
0, 0);
+ /* To the kernel, this will be visible after the kernel has
+ acquired the mutex in the syscall. */
THREAD_SETMEM (THREAD_SELF, robust_head.list_op_pending, NULL);
return ENOTRECOVERABLE;
}
mutex->__data.__count = 1;
if (robust)
{
+ /* We must not enqueue the mutex before we have acquired it.
+ Also see comments at ENQUEUE_MUTEX. */
+ __asm ("" ::: "memory");
ENQUEUE_MUTEX_PI (mutex);
+ /* We need to clear op_pending after we enqueue the mutex. */
+ __asm ("" ::: "memory");
THREAD_SETMEM (THREAD_SELF, robust_head.list_op_pending, NULL);
}
}
/* Remove mutex from the list. */
THREAD_SETMEM (THREAD_SELF, robust_head.list_op_pending,
&mutex->__data.__list.__next);
+ /* We must set op_pending before we dequeue the mutex. Also see
+ comments at ENQUEUE_MUTEX. */
+ __asm ("" ::: "memory");
DEQUEUE_MUTEX (mutex);
mutex->__data.__owner = newowner;
& FUTEX_WAITERS) != 0))
lll_futex_wake (&mutex->__data.__lock, 1, private);
+ /* We must clear op_pending after we release the mutex.
+ FIXME However, this violates the mutex destruction requirements
+ because another thread could acquire the mutex, destroy it, and
+ reuse the memory for something else; then, if this thread crashes,
+ and the memory happens to have a value equal to the TID, the kernel
+ will believe it is still related to the mutex (which has been
+ destroyed already) and will modify some other random object. */
+ __asm ("" ::: "memory");
THREAD_SETMEM (THREAD_SELF, robust_head.list_op_pending, NULL);
break;
THREAD_SETMEM (THREAD_SELF, robust_head.list_op_pending,
(void *) (((uintptr_t) &mutex->__data.__list.__next)
| 1));
+ /* We must set op_pending before we dequeue the mutex. Also see
+ comments at ENQUEUE_MUTEX. */
+ __asm ("" ::: "memory");
DEQUEUE_MUTEX (mutex);
}
while (!atomic_compare_exchange_weak_release (&mutex->__data.__lock,
&l, 0));
+ /* This happens after the kernel releases the mutex but violates the
+ mutex destruction requirements; see comments in the code handling
+ PTHREAD_MUTEX_ROBUST_NORMAL_NP. */
THREAD_SETMEM (THREAD_SELF, robust_head.list_op_pending, NULL);
break;
#endif /* __NR_futex. */
projects / thirdparty / glibc.git / commitdiff
