[Message part 6 (text/plain, inline)]
Hello,
As seen in ccb80964cd7cd112e300c34d32f67125a6d6da9a, there’s a lock
ordering mismatch between ‘do_thread exit’ and ‘fat_mutex_lock’
wrt. ‘t->admin_mutex’ and ‘m->lock’.
I thought this commit solved the problem, but now I think it doesn’t
because it leaves a small window during which a mutex could be held by a
thread without being part of its `mutexes' list, thereby violating the
invariant tested at line 667:
/* Since MUTEX is in `t->mutexes', T must be its owner. */
assert (scm_is_eq (m->owner, t->handle));
So I reverted the patch.
(The situation isn’t better without the patch since
“while ./check-guile srfi-18.test threads.test ; do : ; done”
eventually hits the assertion failure.)
I tried the attached patch, which is inelegant and leads to deadlocks
with canceled threads (namely the “cancel succeeds” test in
threads.test.)
IOW I would welcome fresh ideas to approach the problem. :-)
Thanks,
Ludo’.
[Message part 7 (text/x-patch, inline)]
Modified libguile/threads.c
diff --git a/libguile/threads.c b/libguile/threads.c
index cbacfca..d537e0e 100644
--- a/libguile/threads.c
+++ b/libguile/threads.c
@@ -1353,12 +1353,24 @@ fat_mutex_lock (SCM mutex, scm_t_timespec *timeout, SCM owner, int *ret)
fat_mutex *m = SCM_MUTEX_DATA (mutex);
SCM new_owner = SCM_UNBNDP (owner) ? scm_current_thread() : owner;
+ scm_i_thread *t =
+ scm_is_true (new_owner) ? SCM_I_THREAD_DATA (new_owner) : NULL;
SCM err = SCM_BOOL_F;
struct timeval current_time;
- scm_i_scm_pthread_mutex_lock (&m->lock);
+#define LOCK \
+ if (t != NULL) \
+ scm_i_pthread_mutex_lock (&t->admin_mutex); \
+ scm_i_pthread_mutex_lock (&m->lock)
+
+#define UNLOCK \
+ scm_i_pthread_mutex_unlock (&m->lock); \
+ if (t != NULL) \
+ scm_i_pthread_mutex_unlock (&t->admin_mutex)
+
+ LOCK;
while (1)
{
if (m->level == 0)
@@ -1367,22 +1379,12 @@ fat_mutex_lock (SCM mutex, scm_t_timespec *timeout, SCM owner, int *ret)
m->level++;
if (SCM_I_IS_THREAD (new_owner))
- {
- scm_i_thread *t = SCM_I_THREAD_DATA (new_owner);
-
- scm_i_pthread_mutex_unlock (&m->lock);
- scm_i_pthread_mutex_lock (&t->admin_mutex);
-
- /* Only keep a weak reference to MUTEX so that it's not
- retained when not referenced elsewhere (bug #27450).
- The weak pair itself is eventually removed when MUTEX
- is unlocked. Note that `t->mutexes' lists mutexes
- currently held by T, so it should be small. */
- t->mutexes = scm_weak_car_pair (mutex, t->mutexes);
-
- scm_i_pthread_mutex_unlock (&t->admin_mutex);
- scm_i_pthread_mutex_lock (&m->lock);
- }
+ /* Only keep a weak reference to MUTEX so that it's not
+ retained when not referenced elsewhere (bug #27450).
+ The weak pair itself is eventually removed when MUTEX
+ is unlocked. Note that `t->mutexes' lists mutexes
+ currently held by T, so it should be small. */
+ t->mutexes = scm_weak_car_pair (mutex, t->mutexes);
*ret = 1;
break;
}
@@ -1425,13 +1427,18 @@ fat_mutex_lock (SCM mutex, scm_t_timespec *timeout, SCM owner, int *ret)
}
}
block_self (m->waiting, mutex, &m->lock, timeout);
- scm_i_pthread_mutex_unlock (&m->lock);
- SCM_TICK;
- scm_i_scm_pthread_mutex_lock (&m->lock);
+
+ /* UNLOCK; */
+ /* SCM_TICK; */
+ /* LOCK; */
}
}
- scm_i_pthread_mutex_unlock (&m->lock);
+
+ UNLOCK;
+
return err;
+#undef LOCK
+#undef UNLOCK
}
SCM scm_lock_mutex (SCM mx)