[OpenWrt-Devel] [PATCH 2/2] musl: restore lock skipping for mostly-singlethreaded programs, and related patches
Matthias Schiffer
mschiffer at universe-factory.net
Sat May 23 15:55:21 EDT 2020
The remainder of the patch series proposed by upstream [2] for the locking
synchronization issue [1].
[1] https://www.openwall.com/lists/musl/2020/05/22/3
[2] https://www.openwall.com/lists/musl/2020/05/22/10
Signed-off-by: Matthias Schiffer <mschiffer at universe-factory.net>
---
...ist-unlink-in-pthread_exit-after-all.patch | 51 +++++++++++
...own-size-of-some-libc-struct-members.patch | 25 ++++++
...pping-for-processes-that-return-to-s.patch | 90 +++++++++++++++++++
3 files changed, 166 insertions(+)
create mode 100644 toolchain/musl/patches/500-0001-reorder-thread-list-unlink-in-pthread_exit-after-all.patch
create mode 100644 toolchain/musl/patches/500-0003-cut-down-size-of-some-libc-struct-members.patch
create mode 100644 toolchain/musl/patches/500-0004-restore-lock-skipping-for-processes-that-return-to-s.patch
diff --git a/toolchain/musl/patches/500-0001-reorder-thread-list-unlink-in-pthread_exit-after-all.patch b/toolchain/musl/patches/500-0001-reorder-thread-list-unlink-in-pthread_exit-after-all.patch
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..d47f2f4108a6
--- /dev/null
+++ b/toolchain/musl/patches/500-0001-reorder-thread-list-unlink-in-pthread_exit-after-all.patch
@@ -0,0 +1,51 @@
+From 4d5aa20a94a2d3fae3e69289dc23ecafbd0c16c4 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
+From: Rich Felker <dalias at aerifal.cx>
+Date: Fri, 22 May 2020 17:35:14 -0400
+Subject: [PATCH 1/4] reorder thread list unlink in pthread_exit after all
+ locks
+
+since the backend for LOCK() skips locking if single-threaded, it's
+unsafe to make the process appear single-threaded before the last use
+of lock.
+
+this fixes potential unsynchronized access to a linked list via
+__dl_thread_cleanup.
+---
+ src/thread/pthread_create.c | 19 +++++++++++--------
+ 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
+
+--- a/src/thread/pthread_create.c
++++ b/src/thread/pthread_create.c
+@@ -90,14 +90,7 @@ _Noreturn void __pthread_exit(void *resu
+ exit(0);
+ }
+
+- /* At this point we are committed to thread termination. Unlink
+- * the thread from the list. This change will not be visible
+- * until the lock is released, which only happens after SYS_exit
+- * has been called, via the exit futex address pointing at the lock. */
+- libc.threads_minus_1--;
+- self->next->prev = self->prev;
+- self->prev->next = self->next;
+- self->prev = self->next = self;
++ /* At this point we are committed to thread termination. */
+
+ /* Process robust list in userspace to handle non-pshared mutexes
+ * and the detached thread case where the robust list head will
+@@ -121,6 +114,16 @@ _Noreturn void __pthread_exit(void *resu
+ __do_orphaned_stdio_locks();
+ __dl_thread_cleanup();
+
++ /* Last, unlink thread from the list. This change will not be visible
++ * until the lock is released, which only happens after SYS_exit
++ * has been called, via the exit futex address pointing at the lock.
++ * This needs to happen after any possible calls to LOCK() that might
++ * skip locking if libc.threads_minus_1 is zero. */
++ libc.threads_minus_1--;
++ self->next->prev = self->prev;
++ self->prev->next = self->next;
++ self->prev = self->next = self;
++
+ /* This atomic potentially competes with a concurrent pthread_detach
+ * call; the loser is responsible for freeing thread resources. */
+ int state = a_cas(&self->detach_state, DT_JOINABLE, DT_EXITING);
diff --git a/toolchain/musl/patches/500-0003-cut-down-size-of-some-libc-struct-members.patch b/toolchain/musl/patches/500-0003-cut-down-size-of-some-libc-struct-members.patch
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..66504343979f
--- /dev/null
+++ b/toolchain/musl/patches/500-0003-cut-down-size-of-some-libc-struct-members.patch
@@ -0,0 +1,25 @@
+From f12888e9eb9eed60cc266b899dcafecb4752964a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
+From: Rich Felker <dalias at aerifal.cx>
+Date: Fri, 22 May 2020 17:25:38 -0400
+Subject: [PATCH 3/4] cut down size of some libc struct members
+
+these are all flags that can be single-byte values.
+---
+ src/internal/libc.h | 6 +++---
+ 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
+
+--- a/src/internal/libc.h
++++ b/src/internal/libc.h
+@@ -18,9 +18,9 @@ struct tls_module {
+ };
+
+ struct __libc {
+- int can_do_threads;
+- int threaded;
+- int secure;
++ char can_do_threads;
++ char threaded;
++ char secure;
+ int threads_minus_1;
+ size_t *auxv;
+ struct tls_module *tls_head;
diff --git a/toolchain/musl/patches/500-0004-restore-lock-skipping-for-processes-that-return-to-s.patch b/toolchain/musl/patches/500-0004-restore-lock-skipping-for-processes-that-return-to-s.patch
new file mode 100644
index 000000000000..83a6d0247a9f
--- /dev/null
+++ b/toolchain/musl/patches/500-0004-restore-lock-skipping-for-processes-that-return-to-s.patch
@@ -0,0 +1,90 @@
+From 8d81ba8c0bc6fe31136cb15c9c82ef4c24965040 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
+From: Rich Felker <dalias at aerifal.cx>
+Date: Fri, 22 May 2020 17:45:47 -0400
+Subject: [PATCH 4/4] restore lock-skipping for processes that return to
+ single-threaded state
+
+the design used here relies on the barrier provided by the first lock
+operation after the process returns to single-threaded state to
+synchronize with actions by the last thread that exited. by storing
+the intent to change modes in the same object used to detect whether
+locking is needed, it's possible to avoid an extra (possibly costly)
+memory load after the lock is taken.
+---
+ src/internal/libc.h | 1 +
+ src/malloc/malloc.c | 5 ++++-
+ src/thread/__lock.c | 4 +++-
+ src/thread/pthread_create.c | 8 ++++----
+ 4 files changed, 12 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
+
+--- a/src/internal/libc.h
++++ b/src/internal/libc.h
+@@ -21,6 +21,7 @@ struct __libc {
+ char can_do_threads;
+ char threaded;
+ char secure;
++ volatile signed char need_locks;
+ int threads_minus_1;
+ size_t *auxv;
+ struct tls_module *tls_head;
+--- a/src/malloc/malloc.c
++++ b/src/malloc/malloc.c
+@@ -26,8 +26,11 @@ int __malloc_replaced;
+
+ static inline void lock(volatile int *lk)
+ {
+- if (libc.threaded)
++ int need_locks = libc.need_locks;
++ if (need_locks) {
+ while(a_swap(lk, 1)) __wait(lk, lk+1, 1, 1);
++ if (need_locks < 0) libc.need_locks = 0;
++ }
+ }
+
+ static inline void unlock(volatile int *lk)
+--- a/src/thread/__lock.c
++++ b/src/thread/__lock.c
+@@ -18,9 +18,11 @@
+
+ void __lock(volatile int *l)
+ {
+- if (!libc.threaded) return;
++ int need_locks = libc.need_locks;
++ if (!need_locks) return;
+ /* fast path: INT_MIN for the lock, +1 for the congestion */
+ int current = a_cas(l, 0, INT_MIN + 1);
++ if (need_locks < 0) libc.need_locks = 0;
+ if (!current) return;
+ /* A first spin loop, for medium congestion. */
+ for (unsigned i = 0; i < 10; ++i) {
+--- a/src/thread/pthread_create.c
++++ b/src/thread/pthread_create.c
+@@ -118,8 +118,8 @@ _Noreturn void __pthread_exit(void *resu
+ * until the lock is released, which only happens after SYS_exit
+ * has been called, via the exit futex address pointing at the lock.
+ * This needs to happen after any possible calls to LOCK() that might
+- * skip locking if libc.threads_minus_1 is zero. */
+- libc.threads_minus_1--;
++ * skip locking if process appears single-threaded. */
++ if (!--libc.threads_minus_1) libc.need_locks = -1;
+ self->next->prev = self->prev;
+ self->prev->next = self->next;
+ self->prev = self->next = self;
+@@ -339,7 +339,7 @@ int __pthread_create(pthread_t *restrict
+ ~(1UL<<((SIGCANCEL-1)%(8*sizeof(long))));
+
+ __tl_lock();
+- libc.threads_minus_1++;
++ if (!libc.threads_minus_1++) libc.need_locks = 1;
+ ret = __clone((c11 ? start_c11 : start), stack, flags, args, &new->tid, TP_ADJ(new), &__thread_list_lock);
+
+ /* All clone failures translate to EAGAIN. If explicit scheduling
+@@ -363,7 +363,7 @@ int __pthread_create(pthread_t *restrict
+ new->next->prev = new;
+ new->prev->next = new;
+ } else {
+- libc.threads_minus_1--;
++ if (!--libc.threads_minus_1) libc.need_locks = 0;
+ }
+ __tl_unlock();
+ __restore_sigs(&set);
--
2.26.2
_______________________________________________
openwrt-devel mailing list
openwrt-devel at lists.openwrt.org
https://lists.openwrt.org/mailman/listinfo/openwrt-devel
More information about the openwrt-devel
mailing list