|
Message-ID: <20190925173424.GX9017@brightrain.aerifal.cx> Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2019 13:34:24 -0400 From: Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org> To: musl@...ts.openwall.com Cc: changdiankang <changdiankang@...wei.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH] time: Fix bug in timer_create On Wed, Sep 25, 2019 at 01:19:05PM -0400, Rich Felker wrote: > On Tue, Sep 24, 2019 at 11:16:41AM +0000, changdiankang wrote: > > time: Fix bug in timer_create > > > > When create a SIGEV_THREAD timer, in helper thread "start", > > "id" is assigned with self->timer_id immediately after pthread_create. > > But the real timer_id is assigned to self->timer_id after SYS_timer_create. > > So "id" in "start" always be 0, and timer_delete will always fail. > > Put assignement of "id" after pthread_barrier_wait can fix this bug. > > > > Signed-off-by: Chang Diankang <changdiankang@...wei.com<mailto:changdiankang@...wei.com>> > > > > diff --git a/src/time/timer_create.c b/src/time/timer_create.c > > index c5e40a1..4172b9e 100644 > > --- a/src/time/timer_create.c > > +++ b/src/time/timer_create.c > > @@ -48,13 +48,14 @@ static void *start(void *arg) > > { > > pthread_t self = __pthread_self(); > > struct start_args *args = arg; > > - int id = self->timer_id; > > + int id; > > jmp_buf jb; > > > > void (*notify)(union sigval) = args->sev->sigev_notify_function; > > union sigval val = args->sev->sigev_value; > > > > pthread_barrier_wait(&args->b); > > + id = self->timer_id; > > for (;;) { > > siginfo_t si; > > while (sigwaitinfo(SIGTIMER_SET, &si) < 0); > > > > Thanks! In the future, please send patches as attachments rather than > inline since it looks like your mailer software is corrupting the > patch (converting tabs to spaces, maybe other problems too). I can > apply it manually though. Actually, I don't think this patch is a complete fix. After the barrier wait passes, the caller can immediately call timer_delete, which sets the sign bit of ->timer_id, possibly before the start function reads the initial value of ->timer_id and saves it. I'll extend this to a full fix. Just masking off the bit would be a hack that would work, but would still leave the formal data race, so I think it would make sense to just drop use of the barrier and instead use a semaphore that both sides have to post (timer thread does wait->post, calling thread does post->wait). That would be nice in terms of getting rid of linking dependency on pthread barriers too. Rich
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.