This fixes a FD leak when annex.pidlock is set and -J is used. Also, it
fixes bugs where the pid lock file got deleted because one thread was
done with it, while another thread was still holding it open.
The LockPool now has two distinct types of resources,
one is per-LockHandle and is used for file Handles, which get closed
when the associated LockHandle is closed. The other one is per lock
file, and gets closed when no more LockHandles use that lock file,
including other shared locks of the same file.
That latter kind is used for the pid lock file, so it's opened by the
first thread to use a lock, and closed when the last thread closes a lock.
In practice, this means that eg git-annex get of several files opens and
closes the pidlock file a few times per file. While with -J5 it will open
the pidlock file, process a number of files, until all the threads happen to
finish together, at which point the pidlock file gets closed, and then
that repeats. So in either case, another process still gets a chance to
take the pidlock.
registerPostRelease has a rather intricate dance, there are fine-grained
STM locks, a STM lock of the pidfile itself, and the actual pidlock file
on disk that are all resolved in stages by it.
Sponsored-by: Dartmouth College's Datalad project
This reverts commit 66b2536ea0.
I misunderstood commit ac56a5c2a0
and caused a FD leak when pid locking is not used.
A LockHandle contains an action that will close the underlying lock
file, and that action is run when it is closed. In the case of a shared
lock, the lock file is opened once for each LockHandle, and only
the one for the LockHandle that is being closed will be closed.
This locking has been missing from the beginning of annex.pidlock.
It used to be possble, when two threads are doing conflicting things,
for both to run at the same time despite using locking. Seems likely
that nothing actually had a problem, but it was possible, and this
eliminates that possible source of failure.
Sponsored-by: Dartmouth College's Datalad project
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
This fixes a reversion introduced in commit
ac56a5c2a0.
I didn't notice there that it was handling the case of a shared lock
file that was still open elsewhere by not running the close action.
This was especially deadly when annex.pidlock is set, as it caused early
deletion of the pid lock file.
Sponsored-by: Dartmouth College's Datalad project
nukeFile replaced with removeWhenExistsWith removeLink, which allows
using RawFilePath. Utility.Directory cannot use RawFilePath since setup
does not depend on posix.
This commit was sponsored by Graham Spencer on Patreon.
orElse is great, but was not the right thing to use here because
waitTakeLock could retry for other reasons than the lock being held,
which made tryTakeLock fail when it shouldn't.
Instead, move the code to tryTakeLock and implement waitTakeLock using
tryTakeLock and retry.
(Also, in runTransfer, when checkSaneLock fails, dropLock to avoid leaking a
lock handle.)
This commit was supported by the NSF-funded DataLad project.
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.
The one exception is in Utility.Daemon. As long as a process only
daemonizes once, which seems reasonable, and as long as it avoids calling
checkDaemon once it's already running as a daemon, the fcntl locking
gotchas won't be a problem there.
Annex.LockFile has it's own separate lock pool layer, which has been
renamed to LockCache. This is a persistent cache of locks that persist
until closed.
This is not quite done; lockContent stil needs to be converted.
