2015-05-18 18:16:49 +00:00
|
|
|
{- STM implementation of lock pools.
|
|
|
|
-
|
avoid concurrent threads trying to take pid lock at same time
Seem there are several races that happen when 2 threads run PidLock.tryLock
at the same time. One involves checkSaneLock of the side lock file, which may
be deleted by another process that is dropping the lock, causing checkSaneLock
to fail. And even with the deletion disabled, it can still fail, Probably due
to linkToLock failing when a second thread overwrites the lock file.
The same can happen when 2 processes do, but then one process just fails
to take the lock, which is fine. But with 2 threads, some actions where failing
even though the process as a whole had the pid lock held.
Utility.LockPool.PidLock already maintains a STM lock, and since it uses
LockShared, 2 threads can hold the pidlock at the same time, and when
the first thread drops the lock, it will remain held by the second
thread, and so the pid lock file should not get deleted until the last
thread to hold it drops the lock. Which is the right behavior, and why a
LockShared STM lock is used in the first place.
The problem is that each time it takes the STM lock, it then also calls
PidLock.tryLock. So that was getting called repeatedly and concurrently.
Fixed by noticing when the shared lock is already held, and stop calling
PidLock.tryLock again, just use the pid lock that already exists then.
Also, LockFile.PidLock.tryLock was deleting the pid lock when it failed
to take the lock, which was entirely wrong. It should only drop the side
lock.
Sponsored-by: Dartmouth College's Datalad project
2021-12-01 19:22:31 +00:00
|
|
|
- Copyright 2015-2021 Joey Hess <id@joeyh.name>
|
2015-05-18 18:16:49 +00:00
|
|
|
-
|
|
|
|
- License: BSD-2-clause
|
|
|
|
-}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
module Utility.LockPool.STM (
|
|
|
|
LockPool,
|
|
|
|
lockPool,
|
|
|
|
LockFile,
|
|
|
|
LockMode(..),
|
|
|
|
LockHandle,
|
avoid concurrent threads trying to take pid lock at same time
Seem there are several races that happen when 2 threads run PidLock.tryLock
at the same time. One involves checkSaneLock of the side lock file, which may
be deleted by another process that is dropping the lock, causing checkSaneLock
to fail. And even with the deletion disabled, it can still fail, Probably due
to linkToLock failing when a second thread overwrites the lock file.
The same can happen when 2 processes do, but then one process just fails
to take the lock, which is fine. But with 2 threads, some actions where failing
even though the process as a whole had the pid lock held.
Utility.LockPool.PidLock already maintains a STM lock, and since it uses
LockShared, 2 threads can hold the pidlock at the same time, and when
the first thread drops the lock, it will remain held by the second
thread, and so the pid lock file should not get deleted until the last
thread to hold it drops the lock. Which is the right behavior, and why a
LockShared STM lock is used in the first place.
The problem is that each time it takes the STM lock, it then also calls
PidLock.tryLock. So that was getting called repeatedly and concurrently.
Fixed by noticing when the shared lock is already held, and stop calling
PidLock.tryLock again, just use the pid lock that already exists then.
Also, LockFile.PidLock.tryLock was deleting the pid lock when it failed
to take the lock, which was entirely wrong. It should only drop the side
lock.
Sponsored-by: Dartmouth College's Datalad project
2021-12-01 19:22:31 +00:00
|
|
|
FirstLock(..),
|
|
|
|
FirstLockSemVal(..),
|
2015-05-18 18:16:49 +00:00
|
|
|
waitTakeLock,
|
|
|
|
tryTakeLock,
|
|
|
|
getLockStatus,
|
|
|
|
releaseLock,
|
Fix shared lock file FD leak.
This fixes behavior in this situation:
l1 <- lockShared Nothing "lck"
l2 <- lockShared Nothing "lck"
dropLock l1
dropLock l2
Before, the lock was dropped upon the second dropLock call, but the fd
remained open, and would never be closed while the program was running.
Fixed by a rather round-about method, but it should work well enough.
It would have been simpler to open open the shared lock once, and not open
it again in the second call to lockShared. But, that's difficult to do
atomically.
This also affects Windows and PID locks, not just posix locks.
In the case of pid locks, multiple calls to waitLock within the same
process are allowed because the side lock is locked using a posix lock,
and so multiple exclusive locks can be taken in the same process. So,
this change fixes a similar problem with pid locks.
l1 <- waitLock (Seconds 1) "lck"
l2 <- waitLock (Seconds 1) "lck"
dropLock l1
dropLock l2
Here the l2 side lock fd remained open but not locked,
although the pid lock file was removed. After this change, the second
dropLock will close both fds to the side lock, and delete the pidlock.
2016-03-01 19:31:39 +00:00
|
|
|
CloseLockFile,
|
|
|
|
registerCloseLockFile,
|
2015-05-18 18:16:49 +00:00
|
|
|
) where
|
|
|
|
|
Fix shared lock file FD leak.
This fixes behavior in this situation:
l1 <- lockShared Nothing "lck"
l2 <- lockShared Nothing "lck"
dropLock l1
dropLock l2
Before, the lock was dropped upon the second dropLock call, but the fd
remained open, and would never be closed while the program was running.
Fixed by a rather round-about method, but it should work well enough.
It would have been simpler to open open the shared lock once, and not open
it again in the second call to lockShared. But, that's difficult to do
atomically.
This also affects Windows and PID locks, not just posix locks.
In the case of pid locks, multiple calls to waitLock within the same
process are allowed because the side lock is locked using a posix lock,
and so multiple exclusive locks can be taken in the same process. So,
this change fixes a similar problem with pid locks.
l1 <- waitLock (Seconds 1) "lck"
l2 <- waitLock (Seconds 1) "lck"
dropLock l1
dropLock l2
Here the l2 side lock fd remained open but not locked,
although the pid lock file was removed. After this change, the second
dropLock will close both fds to the side lock, and delete the pidlock.
2016-03-01 19:31:39 +00:00
|
|
|
import Utility.Monad
|
|
|
|
|
2015-05-18 18:16:49 +00:00
|
|
|
import System.IO.Unsafe (unsafePerformIO)
|
2020-10-29 14:33:12 +00:00
|
|
|
import System.FilePath.ByteString (RawFilePath)
|
2015-05-18 18:16:49 +00:00
|
|
|
import qualified Data.Map.Strict as M
|
|
|
|
import Control.Concurrent.STM
|
|
|
|
import Control.Exception
|
|
|
|
|
2020-10-29 14:33:12 +00:00
|
|
|
type LockFile = RawFilePath
|
2015-05-18 18:16:49 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
data LockMode = LockExclusive | LockShared
|
|
|
|
deriving (Eq)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-- This TMVar is full when the handle is open, and is emptied when it's
|
|
|
|
-- closed.
|
2020-07-21 19:30:47 +00:00
|
|
|
type LockHandle = TMVar (LockPool, LockFile, CloseLockFile)
|
2015-05-18 18:16:49 +00:00
|
|
|
|
avoid concurrent threads trying to take pid lock at same time
Seem there are several races that happen when 2 threads run PidLock.tryLock
at the same time. One involves checkSaneLock of the side lock file, which may
be deleted by another process that is dropping the lock, causing checkSaneLock
to fail. And even with the deletion disabled, it can still fail, Probably due
to linkToLock failing when a second thread overwrites the lock file.
The same can happen when 2 processes do, but then one process just fails
to take the lock, which is fine. But with 2 threads, some actions where failing
even though the process as a whole had the pid lock held.
Utility.LockPool.PidLock already maintains a STM lock, and since it uses
LockShared, 2 threads can hold the pidlock at the same time, and when
the first thread drops the lock, it will remain held by the second
thread, and so the pid lock file should not get deleted until the last
thread to hold it drops the lock. Which is the right behavior, and why a
LockShared STM lock is used in the first place.
The problem is that each time it takes the STM lock, it then also calls
PidLock.tryLock. So that was getting called repeatedly and concurrently.
Fixed by noticing when the shared lock is already held, and stop calling
PidLock.tryLock again, just use the pid lock that already exists then.
Also, LockFile.PidLock.tryLock was deleting the pid lock when it failed
to take the lock, which was entirely wrong. It should only drop the side
lock.
Sponsored-by: Dartmouth College's Datalad project
2021-12-01 19:22:31 +00:00
|
|
|
-- When a shared lock is taken, this will only be true for the first
|
|
|
|
-- process, not subsequent processes. The first process should
|
|
|
|
-- fill the FirstLockSem after doing any IO actions to finish lock setup
|
|
|
|
-- and subsequent processes can block on that getting filled to know
|
|
|
|
-- when the lock is fully set up.
|
|
|
|
data FirstLock = FirstLock Bool FirstLockSem
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
type FirstLockSem = TMVar FirstLockSemVal
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
data FirstLockSemVal = FirstLockSemWaited Bool | FirstLockSemTried Bool
|
|
|
|
|
2015-05-18 18:16:49 +00:00
|
|
|
type LockCount = Integer
|
|
|
|
|
avoid concurrent threads trying to take pid lock at same time
Seem there are several races that happen when 2 threads run PidLock.tryLock
at the same time. One involves checkSaneLock of the side lock file, which may
be deleted by another process that is dropping the lock, causing checkSaneLock
to fail. And even with the deletion disabled, it can still fail, Probably due
to linkToLock failing when a second thread overwrites the lock file.
The same can happen when 2 processes do, but then one process just fails
to take the lock, which is fine. But with 2 threads, some actions where failing
even though the process as a whole had the pid lock held.
Utility.LockPool.PidLock already maintains a STM lock, and since it uses
LockShared, 2 threads can hold the pidlock at the same time, and when
the first thread drops the lock, it will remain held by the second
thread, and so the pid lock file should not get deleted until the last
thread to hold it drops the lock. Which is the right behavior, and why a
LockShared STM lock is used in the first place.
The problem is that each time it takes the STM lock, it then also calls
PidLock.tryLock. So that was getting called repeatedly and concurrently.
Fixed by noticing when the shared lock is already held, and stop calling
PidLock.tryLock again, just use the pid lock that already exists then.
Also, LockFile.PidLock.tryLock was deleting the pid lock when it failed
to take the lock, which was entirely wrong. It should only drop the side
lock.
Sponsored-by: Dartmouth College's Datalad project
2021-12-01 19:22:31 +00:00
|
|
|
data LockStatus = LockStatus LockMode LockCount FirstLockSem
|
Fix shared lock file FD leak.
This fixes behavior in this situation:
l1 <- lockShared Nothing "lck"
l2 <- lockShared Nothing "lck"
dropLock l1
dropLock l2
Before, the lock was dropped upon the second dropLock call, but the fd
remained open, and would never be closed while the program was running.
Fixed by a rather round-about method, but it should work well enough.
It would have been simpler to open open the shared lock once, and not open
it again in the second call to lockShared. But, that's difficult to do
atomically.
This also affects Windows and PID locks, not just posix locks.
In the case of pid locks, multiple calls to waitLock within the same
process are allowed because the side lock is locked using a posix lock,
and so multiple exclusive locks can be taken in the same process. So,
this change fixes a similar problem with pid locks.
l1 <- waitLock (Seconds 1) "lck"
l2 <- waitLock (Seconds 1) "lck"
dropLock l1
dropLock l2
Here the l2 side lock fd remained open but not locked,
although the pid lock file was removed. After this change, the second
dropLock will close both fds to the side lock, and delete the pidlock.
2016-03-01 19:31:39 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
type CloseLockFile = IO ()
|
2015-05-18 18:16:49 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-- This TMVar is normally kept full.
|
|
|
|
type LockPool = TMVar (M.Map LockFile LockStatus)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-- A shared global variable for the lockPool. Avoids callers needing to
|
|
|
|
-- maintain state for this implementation detail.
|
2017-05-25 20:02:17 +00:00
|
|
|
{-# NOINLINE lockPool #-}
|
2015-05-18 18:16:49 +00:00
|
|
|
lockPool :: LockPool
|
|
|
|
lockPool = unsafePerformIO (newTMVarIO M.empty)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-- Updates the LockPool, blocking as necessary if another thread is holding
|
|
|
|
-- a conflicting lock.
|
|
|
|
--
|
|
|
|
-- Note that when a shared lock is held, an exclusive lock will block.
|
|
|
|
-- While that blocking is happening, another call to this function to take
|
|
|
|
-- the same shared lock should not be blocked on the exclusive lock.
|
|
|
|
-- Keeping the whole Map in a TMVar accomplishes this, at the expense of
|
|
|
|
-- sometimes retrying after unrelated changes in the map.
|
avoid concurrent threads trying to take pid lock at same time
Seem there are several races that happen when 2 threads run PidLock.tryLock
at the same time. One involves checkSaneLock of the side lock file, which may
be deleted by another process that is dropping the lock, causing checkSaneLock
to fail. And even with the deletion disabled, it can still fail, Probably due
to linkToLock failing when a second thread overwrites the lock file.
The same can happen when 2 processes do, but then one process just fails
to take the lock, which is fine. But with 2 threads, some actions where failing
even though the process as a whole had the pid lock held.
Utility.LockPool.PidLock already maintains a STM lock, and since it uses
LockShared, 2 threads can hold the pidlock at the same time, and when
the first thread drops the lock, it will remain held by the second
thread, and so the pid lock file should not get deleted until the last
thread to hold it drops the lock. Which is the right behavior, and why a
LockShared STM lock is used in the first place.
The problem is that each time it takes the STM lock, it then also calls
PidLock.tryLock. So that was getting called repeatedly and concurrently.
Fixed by noticing when the shared lock is already held, and stop calling
PidLock.tryLock again, just use the pid lock that already exists then.
Also, LockFile.PidLock.tryLock was deleting the pid lock when it failed
to take the lock, which was entirely wrong. It should only drop the side
lock.
Sponsored-by: Dartmouth College's Datalad project
2021-12-01 19:22:31 +00:00
|
|
|
waitTakeLock :: LockPool -> LockFile -> LockMode -> STM (LockHandle, FirstLock)
|
2017-05-25 20:02:17 +00:00
|
|
|
waitTakeLock pool file mode = maybe retry return =<< tryTakeLock pool file mode
|
2015-05-18 18:16:49 +00:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
-- Avoids blocking if another thread is holding a conflicting lock.
|
avoid concurrent threads trying to take pid lock at same time
Seem there are several races that happen when 2 threads run PidLock.tryLock
at the same time. One involves checkSaneLock of the side lock file, which may
be deleted by another process that is dropping the lock, causing checkSaneLock
to fail. And even with the deletion disabled, it can still fail, Probably due
to linkToLock failing when a second thread overwrites the lock file.
The same can happen when 2 processes do, but then one process just fails
to take the lock, which is fine. But with 2 threads, some actions where failing
even though the process as a whole had the pid lock held.
Utility.LockPool.PidLock already maintains a STM lock, and since it uses
LockShared, 2 threads can hold the pidlock at the same time, and when
the first thread drops the lock, it will remain held by the second
thread, and so the pid lock file should not get deleted until the last
thread to hold it drops the lock. Which is the right behavior, and why a
LockShared STM lock is used in the first place.
The problem is that each time it takes the STM lock, it then also calls
PidLock.tryLock. So that was getting called repeatedly and concurrently.
Fixed by noticing when the shared lock is already held, and stop calling
PidLock.tryLock again, just use the pid lock that already exists then.
Also, LockFile.PidLock.tryLock was deleting the pid lock when it failed
to take the lock, which was entirely wrong. It should only drop the side
lock.
Sponsored-by: Dartmouth College's Datalad project
2021-12-01 19:22:31 +00:00
|
|
|
tryTakeLock :: LockPool -> LockFile -> LockMode -> STM (Maybe (LockHandle, FirstLock))
|
2017-05-25 20:02:17 +00:00
|
|
|
tryTakeLock pool file mode = do
|
|
|
|
m <- takeTMVar pool
|
avoid concurrent threads trying to take pid lock at same time
Seem there are several races that happen when 2 threads run PidLock.tryLock
at the same time. One involves checkSaneLock of the side lock file, which may
be deleted by another process that is dropping the lock, causing checkSaneLock
to fail. And even with the deletion disabled, it can still fail, Probably due
to linkToLock failing when a second thread overwrites the lock file.
The same can happen when 2 processes do, but then one process just fails
to take the lock, which is fine. But with 2 threads, some actions where failing
even though the process as a whole had the pid lock held.
Utility.LockPool.PidLock already maintains a STM lock, and since it uses
LockShared, 2 threads can hold the pidlock at the same time, and when
the first thread drops the lock, it will remain held by the second
thread, and so the pid lock file should not get deleted until the last
thread to hold it drops the lock. Which is the right behavior, and why a
LockShared STM lock is used in the first place.
The problem is that each time it takes the STM lock, it then also calls
PidLock.tryLock. So that was getting called repeatedly and concurrently.
Fixed by noticing when the shared lock is already held, and stop calling
PidLock.tryLock again, just use the pid lock that already exists then.
Also, LockFile.PidLock.tryLock was deleting the pid lock when it failed
to take the lock, which was entirely wrong. It should only drop the side
lock.
Sponsored-by: Dartmouth College's Datalad project
2021-12-01 19:22:31 +00:00
|
|
|
let success firstlock v = do
|
2017-05-25 20:02:17 +00:00
|
|
|
putTMVar pool (M.insert file v m)
|
avoid concurrent threads trying to take pid lock at same time
Seem there are several races that happen when 2 threads run PidLock.tryLock
at the same time. One involves checkSaneLock of the side lock file, which may
be deleted by another process that is dropping the lock, causing checkSaneLock
to fail. And even with the deletion disabled, it can still fail, Probably due
to linkToLock failing when a second thread overwrites the lock file.
The same can happen when 2 processes do, but then one process just fails
to take the lock, which is fine. But with 2 threads, some actions where failing
even though the process as a whole had the pid lock held.
Utility.LockPool.PidLock already maintains a STM lock, and since it uses
LockShared, 2 threads can hold the pidlock at the same time, and when
the first thread drops the lock, it will remain held by the second
thread, and so the pid lock file should not get deleted until the last
thread to hold it drops the lock. Which is the right behavior, and why a
LockShared STM lock is used in the first place.
The problem is that each time it takes the STM lock, it then also calls
PidLock.tryLock. So that was getting called repeatedly and concurrently.
Fixed by noticing when the shared lock is already held, and stop calling
PidLock.tryLock again, just use the pid lock that already exists then.
Also, LockFile.PidLock.tryLock was deleting the pid lock when it failed
to take the lock, which was entirely wrong. It should only drop the side
lock.
Sponsored-by: Dartmouth College's Datalad project
2021-12-01 19:22:31 +00:00
|
|
|
tmv <- newTMVar (pool, file, noop)
|
|
|
|
return (Just (tmv, firstlock))
|
2017-05-25 20:02:17 +00:00
|
|
|
case M.lookup file m of
|
avoid concurrent threads trying to take pid lock at same time
Seem there are several races that happen when 2 threads run PidLock.tryLock
at the same time. One involves checkSaneLock of the side lock file, which may
be deleted by another process that is dropping the lock, causing checkSaneLock
to fail. And even with the deletion disabled, it can still fail, Probably due
to linkToLock failing when a second thread overwrites the lock file.
The same can happen when 2 processes do, but then one process just fails
to take the lock, which is fine. But with 2 threads, some actions where failing
even though the process as a whole had the pid lock held.
Utility.LockPool.PidLock already maintains a STM lock, and since it uses
LockShared, 2 threads can hold the pidlock at the same time, and when
the first thread drops the lock, it will remain held by the second
thread, and so the pid lock file should not get deleted until the last
thread to hold it drops the lock. Which is the right behavior, and why a
LockShared STM lock is used in the first place.
The problem is that each time it takes the STM lock, it then also calls
PidLock.tryLock. So that was getting called repeatedly and concurrently.
Fixed by noticing when the shared lock is already held, and stop calling
PidLock.tryLock again, just use the pid lock that already exists then.
Also, LockFile.PidLock.tryLock was deleting the pid lock when it failed
to take the lock, which was entirely wrong. It should only drop the side
lock.
Sponsored-by: Dartmouth College's Datalad project
2021-12-01 19:22:31 +00:00
|
|
|
Just (LockStatus mode' n firstlocksem)
|
|
|
|
| mode == LockShared && mode' == LockShared -> do
|
|
|
|
fl@(FirstLock _ firstlocksem') <- if n == 0
|
|
|
|
then FirstLock True <$> newEmptyTMVar
|
|
|
|
else pure (FirstLock False firstlocksem)
|
|
|
|
success fl $ LockStatus mode (succ n) firstlocksem'
|
2017-05-25 20:02:17 +00:00
|
|
|
| n > 0 -> do
|
|
|
|
putTMVar pool m
|
|
|
|
return Nothing
|
avoid concurrent threads trying to take pid lock at same time
Seem there are several races that happen when 2 threads run PidLock.tryLock
at the same time. One involves checkSaneLock of the side lock file, which may
be deleted by another process that is dropping the lock, causing checkSaneLock
to fail. And even with the deletion disabled, it can still fail, Probably due
to linkToLock failing when a second thread overwrites the lock file.
The same can happen when 2 processes do, but then one process just fails
to take the lock, which is fine. But with 2 threads, some actions where failing
even though the process as a whole had the pid lock held.
Utility.LockPool.PidLock already maintains a STM lock, and since it uses
LockShared, 2 threads can hold the pidlock at the same time, and when
the first thread drops the lock, it will remain held by the second
thread, and so the pid lock file should not get deleted until the last
thread to hold it drops the lock. Which is the right behavior, and why a
LockShared STM lock is used in the first place.
The problem is that each time it takes the STM lock, it then also calls
PidLock.tryLock. So that was getting called repeatedly and concurrently.
Fixed by noticing when the shared lock is already held, and stop calling
PidLock.tryLock again, just use the pid lock that already exists then.
Also, LockFile.PidLock.tryLock was deleting the pid lock when it failed
to take the lock, which was entirely wrong. It should only drop the side
lock.
Sponsored-by: Dartmouth College's Datalad project
2021-12-01 19:22:31 +00:00
|
|
|
_ -> do
|
|
|
|
firstlocksem <- newEmptyTMVar
|
|
|
|
success (FirstLock True firstlocksem) $ LockStatus mode 1 firstlocksem
|
2015-05-18 18:16:49 +00:00
|
|
|
|
Fix shared lock file FD leak.
This fixes behavior in this situation:
l1 <- lockShared Nothing "lck"
l2 <- lockShared Nothing "lck"
dropLock l1
dropLock l2
Before, the lock was dropped upon the second dropLock call, but the fd
remained open, and would never be closed while the program was running.
Fixed by a rather round-about method, but it should work well enough.
It would have been simpler to open open the shared lock once, and not open
it again in the second call to lockShared. But, that's difficult to do
atomically.
This also affects Windows and PID locks, not just posix locks.
In the case of pid locks, multiple calls to waitLock within the same
process are allowed because the side lock is locked using a posix lock,
and so multiple exclusive locks can be taken in the same process. So,
this change fixes a similar problem with pid locks.
l1 <- waitLock (Seconds 1) "lck"
l2 <- waitLock (Seconds 1) "lck"
dropLock l1
dropLock l2
Here the l2 side lock fd remained open but not locked,
although the pid lock file was removed. After this change, the second
dropLock will close both fds to the side lock, and delete the pidlock.
2016-03-01 19:31:39 +00:00
|
|
|
-- Call after waitTakeLock or tryTakeLock, to register a CloseLockFile
|
|
|
|
-- action to run when releasing the lock.
|
2020-07-21 19:30:47 +00:00
|
|
|
registerCloseLockFile :: LockHandle -> CloseLockFile -> STM ()
|
|
|
|
registerCloseLockFile h closelockfile = do
|
|
|
|
(p, f, c) <- takeTMVar h
|
|
|
|
putTMVar h (p, f, c >> closelockfile)
|
Fix shared lock file FD leak.
This fixes behavior in this situation:
l1 <- lockShared Nothing "lck"
l2 <- lockShared Nothing "lck"
dropLock l1
dropLock l2
Before, the lock was dropped upon the second dropLock call, but the fd
remained open, and would never be closed while the program was running.
Fixed by a rather round-about method, but it should work well enough.
It would have been simpler to open open the shared lock once, and not open
it again in the second call to lockShared. But, that's difficult to do
atomically.
This also affects Windows and PID locks, not just posix locks.
In the case of pid locks, multiple calls to waitLock within the same
process are allowed because the side lock is locked using a posix lock,
and so multiple exclusive locks can be taken in the same process. So,
this change fixes a similar problem with pid locks.
l1 <- waitLock (Seconds 1) "lck"
l2 <- waitLock (Seconds 1) "lck"
dropLock l1
dropLock l2
Here the l2 side lock fd remained open but not locked,
although the pid lock file was removed. After this change, the second
dropLock will close both fds to the side lock, and delete the pidlock.
2016-03-01 19:31:39 +00:00
|
|
|
|
2015-05-18 18:16:49 +00:00
|
|
|
-- Checks if a lock is being held. If it's held by the current process,
|
|
|
|
-- runs the getdefault action; otherwise runs the checker action.
|
|
|
|
--
|
|
|
|
-- Note that the lock pool is left empty while the checker action is run.
|
|
|
|
-- This allows checker actions that open/close files, and so would be in
|
2015-05-18 20:23:07 +00:00
|
|
|
-- danger of conflicting with locks created at the same time this is
|
|
|
|
-- running. With the lock pool empty, anything that attempts
|
|
|
|
-- to take a lock will block, avoiding that race.
|
2015-05-20 03:35:24 +00:00
|
|
|
getLockStatus :: LockPool -> LockFile -> IO v -> IO v -> IO v
|
2015-05-18 18:16:49 +00:00
|
|
|
getLockStatus pool file getdefault checker = do
|
|
|
|
v <- atomically $ do
|
|
|
|
m <- takeTMVar pool
|
|
|
|
let threadlocked = case M.lookup file m of
|
avoid concurrent threads trying to take pid lock at same time
Seem there are several races that happen when 2 threads run PidLock.tryLock
at the same time. One involves checkSaneLock of the side lock file, which may
be deleted by another process that is dropping the lock, causing checkSaneLock
to fail. And even with the deletion disabled, it can still fail, Probably due
to linkToLock failing when a second thread overwrites the lock file.
The same can happen when 2 processes do, but then one process just fails
to take the lock, which is fine. But with 2 threads, some actions where failing
even though the process as a whole had the pid lock held.
Utility.LockPool.PidLock already maintains a STM lock, and since it uses
LockShared, 2 threads can hold the pidlock at the same time, and when
the first thread drops the lock, it will remain held by the second
thread, and so the pid lock file should not get deleted until the last
thread to hold it drops the lock. Which is the right behavior, and why a
LockShared STM lock is used in the first place.
The problem is that each time it takes the STM lock, it then also calls
PidLock.tryLock. So that was getting called repeatedly and concurrently.
Fixed by noticing when the shared lock is already held, and stop calling
PidLock.tryLock again, just use the pid lock that already exists then.
Also, LockFile.PidLock.tryLock was deleting the pid lock when it failed
to take the lock, which was entirely wrong. It should only drop the side
lock.
Sponsored-by: Dartmouth College's Datalad project
2021-12-01 19:22:31 +00:00
|
|
|
Just (LockStatus _ n _) | n > 0 -> True
|
2015-05-18 18:16:49 +00:00
|
|
|
_ -> False
|
|
|
|
if threadlocked
|
|
|
|
then do
|
|
|
|
putTMVar pool m
|
|
|
|
return Nothing
|
|
|
|
else return $ Just $ atomically $ putTMVar pool m
|
|
|
|
case v of
|
2015-05-20 03:35:24 +00:00
|
|
|
Nothing -> getdefault
|
2015-05-18 18:16:49 +00:00
|
|
|
Just restore -> bracket_ (return ()) restore checker
|
|
|
|
|
2021-12-06 16:48:37 +00:00
|
|
|
-- Releases the lock. When it is a shared lock, it may remain locked by
|
|
|
|
-- other LockHandles.
|
2015-05-18 18:16:49 +00:00
|
|
|
--
|
Fix shared lock file FD leak.
This fixes behavior in this situation:
l1 <- lockShared Nothing "lck"
l2 <- lockShared Nothing "lck"
dropLock l1
dropLock l2
Before, the lock was dropped upon the second dropLock call, but the fd
remained open, and would never be closed while the program was running.
Fixed by a rather round-about method, but it should work well enough.
It would have been simpler to open open the shared lock once, and not open
it again in the second call to lockShared. But, that's difficult to do
atomically.
This also affects Windows and PID locks, not just posix locks.
In the case of pid locks, multiple calls to waitLock within the same
process are allowed because the side lock is locked using a posix lock,
and so multiple exclusive locks can be taken in the same process. So,
this change fixes a similar problem with pid locks.
l1 <- waitLock (Seconds 1) "lck"
l2 <- waitLock (Seconds 1) "lck"
dropLock l1
dropLock l2
Here the l2 side lock fd remained open but not locked,
although the pid lock file was removed. After this change, the second
dropLock will close both fds to the side lock, and delete the pidlock.
2016-03-01 19:31:39 +00:00
|
|
|
-- Note that the lock pool is left empty while the CloseLockFile action
|
2015-05-18 18:16:49 +00:00
|
|
|
-- is run, to avoid race with another thread trying to open the same lock
|
|
|
|
-- file.
|
Fix shared lock file FD leak.
This fixes behavior in this situation:
l1 <- lockShared Nothing "lck"
l2 <- lockShared Nothing "lck"
dropLock l1
dropLock l2
Before, the lock was dropped upon the second dropLock call, but the fd
remained open, and would never be closed while the program was running.
Fixed by a rather round-about method, but it should work well enough.
It would have been simpler to open open the shared lock once, and not open
it again in the second call to lockShared. But, that's difficult to do
atomically.
This also affects Windows and PID locks, not just posix locks.
In the case of pid locks, multiple calls to waitLock within the same
process are allowed because the side lock is locked using a posix lock,
and so multiple exclusive locks can be taken in the same process. So,
this change fixes a similar problem with pid locks.
l1 <- waitLock (Seconds 1) "lck"
l2 <- waitLock (Seconds 1) "lck"
dropLock l1
dropLock l2
Here the l2 side lock fd remained open but not locked,
although the pid lock file was removed. After this change, the second
dropLock will close both fds to the side lock, and delete the pidlock.
2016-03-01 19:31:39 +00:00
|
|
|
releaseLock :: LockHandle -> IO ()
|
|
|
|
releaseLock h = go =<< atomically (tryTakeTMVar h)
|
2015-05-18 18:16:49 +00:00
|
|
|
where
|
2020-07-21 19:30:47 +00:00
|
|
|
go (Just (pool, file, closelockfile)) = do
|
2021-12-06 16:48:37 +00:00
|
|
|
m <- atomically $ do
|
2015-05-18 18:16:49 +00:00
|
|
|
m <- takeTMVar pool
|
|
|
|
return $ case M.lookup file m of
|
avoid concurrent threads trying to take pid lock at same time
Seem there are several races that happen when 2 threads run PidLock.tryLock
at the same time. One involves checkSaneLock of the side lock file, which may
be deleted by another process that is dropping the lock, causing checkSaneLock
to fail. And even with the deletion disabled, it can still fail, Probably due
to linkToLock failing when a second thread overwrites the lock file.
The same can happen when 2 processes do, but then one process just fails
to take the lock, which is fine. But with 2 threads, some actions where failing
even though the process as a whole had the pid lock held.
Utility.LockPool.PidLock already maintains a STM lock, and since it uses
LockShared, 2 threads can hold the pidlock at the same time, and when
the first thread drops the lock, it will remain held by the second
thread, and so the pid lock file should not get deleted until the last
thread to hold it drops the lock. Which is the right behavior, and why a
LockShared STM lock is used in the first place.
The problem is that each time it takes the STM lock, it then also calls
PidLock.tryLock. So that was getting called repeatedly and concurrently.
Fixed by noticing when the shared lock is already held, and stop calling
PidLock.tryLock again, just use the pid lock that already exists then.
Also, LockFile.PidLock.tryLock was deleting the pid lock when it failed
to take the lock, which was entirely wrong. It should only drop the side
lock.
Sponsored-by: Dartmouth College's Datalad project
2021-12-01 19:22:31 +00:00
|
|
|
Just (LockStatus mode n firstlocksem)
|
2021-12-06 16:48:37 +00:00
|
|
|
| n == 1 -> (M.delete file m)
|
2015-05-18 18:16:49 +00:00
|
|
|
| otherwise ->
|
2021-12-06 16:48:37 +00:00
|
|
|
(M.insert file (LockStatus mode (pred n) firstlocksem) m)
|
|
|
|
Nothing -> m
|
|
|
|
() <- closelockfile
|
2015-05-18 18:16:49 +00:00
|
|
|
atomically $ putTMVar pool m
|
|
|
|
-- The LockHandle was already closed.
|
|
|
|
go Nothing = return ()
|