fix potential deadlock bug in libc-internal locking logic

if a multithreaded program became non-multithreaded (i.e. all other
threads exited) while one thread held an internal lock, the remaining
thread would fail to release the lock. the the program then became
multithreaded again at a later time, any further attempts to obtain
the lock would deadlock permanently.

the underlying cause is that the value of libc.threads_minus_1 at
unlock time might not match the value at lock time. one solution would
be returning a flag to the caller indicating whether the lock was
taken and needs to be unlocked, but there is a simpler solution: using
the lock itself as such a flag.

note that this flag is not needed anyway for correctness; if the lock
is not held, the unlock code is harmless. however, the memory
synchronization properties associated with a_store are costly on some
archs, so it's best to avoid executing the unlock code when it is
unnecessary.
This commit is contained in:
Rich Felker
2013-09-20 02:00:27 -04:00
parent d8e283df58
commit e803829e6b
3 changed files with 15 additions and 13 deletions

View File

@ -64,28 +64,27 @@ static struct {
static inline void lock(volatile int *lk)
{
if (!libc.threads_minus_1) return;
while(a_swap(lk, 1)) __wait(lk, lk+1, 1, 1);
if (libc.threads_minus_1)
while(a_swap(lk, 1)) __wait(lk, lk+1, 1, 1);
}
static inline void unlock(volatile int *lk)
{
if (!libc.threads_minus_1) return;
a_store(lk, 0);
if (lk[1]) __wake(lk, 1, 1);
if (lk[0]) {
a_store(lk, 0);
if (lk[1]) __wake(lk, 1, 1);
}
}
static inline void lock_bin(int i)
{
if (libc.threads_minus_1)
lock(mal.bins[i].lock);
lock(mal.bins[i].lock);
if (!mal.bins[i].head)
mal.bins[i].head = mal.bins[i].tail = BIN_TO_CHUNK(i);
}
static inline void unlock_bin(int i)
{
if (!libc.threads_minus_1) return;
unlock(mal.bins[i].lock);
}