Re: [PATCH] signal handlers: volatile sigatomic_t, not volatile OR sigatomic_t

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Wed, Mar 20, 2024 at 10:26:04PM +0000, Guilherme Janczak wrote:
> The standard says it's necessary.
> If you have a `volatile long long` on a 32-bit architecture, the
> compiler will have to compile it to some bignum code (meaning multiple
> instructions), and the signal can come in between them.

Agreed, because in this case the variable is not machine-word sized.

What happens if you instead use a 32-bit aligned volatile quantity?
(Or 16 or 8 bits, for that matter, at least on PowerPC [1].)

I would hope that these smaller sizes would work, otherwise, again,
device drivers become problematic on that platform.

							Thanx, Paul

[1] There have been some platforms without 16-bit or 8-bit loads, 
    and on such platforms, you could also see failures of one sort
    or another.

> I can quickly make it happen on a Nintendo Wii (32-bit powerpc) as
> well as an i386 laptop using this test program:
> ```
> #define _POSIX_C_SOURCE 200809L
> 
> #include <sys/time.h>
> 
> #include <stdio.h>
> #include <stdlib.h>
> #include <signal.h>
> #include <string.h>
> 
> static void catch_sigalrm(int);
> 
> volatile unsigned long long longword;
> volatile sig_atomic_t partial_update;
> 
> int
> main(void)
> {
> 	const struct sigaction act = { .sa_handler = catch_sigalrm };
> 	const struct itimerval timer = { 
> 		.it_value.tv_usec = 1, 
> 		.it_interval.tv_usec = 1,
> 	};
> 	unsigned long long n;
> 
> 	sigaction(SIGALRM, &act, NULL);
> 	setitimer(ITIMER_REAL, &timer, NULL);
> 	for (unsigned char i = 0;; i++) {
> 		memset(&n, i, sizeof(n));
> 		longword = n;
> 		if (partial_update) {
> 			fprintf(stderr, "longword partially updated\n");
> 			exit(1);
> 		}
> 	}
> }
> 
> static void
> catch_sigalrm(int unused)
> {
> 	union multibyte {
> 		long long n;
> 		unsigned char bytes[sizeof(long long)];
> 	} window;
> 	(void)unused;	
> 	window.n = longword;
> 
> 	for (size_t i = 1; i < sizeof(window.bytes); i++) {
> 		if (window.bytes[i] != window.bytes[0])
> 			partial_update = 1;
> 	}
> }
> ```
> 
> Output:
> ```
> $ cc -O2 test.c && ./a.out
> longword partially updated
> ```
> 
> The program runs (apparently) forever on my amd64 desktop.
> 
> If you look at the powerpc assembly version of the program in Godbolt:
> https://godbolt.org/z/Pc8q7E5ej
> Lines 69 and 70 of the assembly use 2 STW instructions to store each 
> 32-bit half of the bignum.
> 
> On Wed, Mar 20, 2024 at 04:44:33PM -0400, Elad Lahav wrote:
> > Do you really need volatile?
> > There are two cases to consider. Either your code synchronizes updates
> > to the shared value with the signal handler (e.g., by blocking and
> > then unblocking the signal), in which case I believe the compiler
> > cannot ignore updates to the value; or you don't, and you can't depend
> > on the variable having any specific value in the signal handler. The
> > only thing you want to prevent in the latter case is the handler
> > observing a partial update to the variable, which I presume is where
> > the other requirements originate. (In practice, there should be little
> > or no concern with any primitive type on modern hardware).
> > 
> > --Elad
> > 
> > On Wed, Mar 20, 2024 at 4:32 PM Guilherme Janczak
> > <guilherme.janczak@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > Variables shared with signal handlers must be of type `volatile
> > > sigatomic_t`, not `volatile` or `sigatomic_t` as the current text says,
> > > according to a C11 draft:
> > >
> > >     When ... interrupted by ... a signal, values of objects that are
> > >     neither lock-free atomic objects nor of type volatile sig_atomic_t
> > >     are unspecified.
> > >
> > > Ref: https://www.iso-9899.info/n1570.html#5.1.2.3p5
> > > Signed-off-by: Guilherme Janczak <guilherme.janczak@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > >  memorder/memorder.tex | 4 ++--
> > >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/memorder/memorder.tex b/memorder/memorder.tex
> > > index 5c50d42d..873c3424 100644
> > > --- a/memorder/memorder.tex
> > > +++ b/memorder/memorder.tex
> > > @@ -1317,8 +1317,8 @@ from the viewpoint of the interrupted thread, at least at the
> > >  assembly-language level.
> > >  However, the C and C++ languages do not define the results of handlers
> > >  and interrupted threads sharing plain variables.
> > > -Instead, such shared variables must be \co{sig_atomic_t}, lock-free
> > > -atomics, or \co{volatile}.
> > > +Instead, such shared variables must be \co{volatile sig_atomic_t} or
> > > +lock-free atomics.
> > >
> > >  On the other hand, because the handler executes within the interrupted
> > >  thread's context, the memory ordering used to synchronize communication
> > > --
> > > 2.42.0
> > >
> > >
> 




[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Linux NFS]     [Linux NILFS]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux