diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'lib/tdb/test/run-fcntl-deadlock.c')
| -rw-r--r-- | lib/tdb/test/run-fcntl-deadlock.c | 202 |
1 files changed, 202 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/lib/tdb/test/run-fcntl-deadlock.c b/lib/tdb/test/run-fcntl-deadlock.c new file mode 100644 index 0000000..0a328af --- /dev/null +++ b/lib/tdb/test/run-fcntl-deadlock.c @@ -0,0 +1,202 @@ +#include "../common/tdb_private.h" +#include "../common/io.c" +#include "../common/tdb.c" +#include "../common/lock.c" +#include "../common/freelist.c" +#include "../common/traverse.c" +#include "../common/transaction.c" +#include "../common/error.c" +#include "../common/open.c" +#include "../common/check.c" +#include "../common/hash.c" +#include "../common/mutex.c" +#include "replace.h" +#include "system/filesys.h" +#include "system/time.h" +#include <errno.h> +#include "tap-interface.h" + +/* + * This tests the low level locking requirement + * for the allrecord lock/prepare_commit and traverse_read interaction. + * + * The pattern with the traverse_read and prepare_commit interaction is + * the following: + * + * 1. transaction_start got the allrecord lock with F_RDLCK. + * + * 2. the traverse_read code walks the database in a sequence like this + * (per chain): + * 2.1 chainlock(chainX, F_RDLCK) + * 2.2 recordlock(chainX.record1, F_RDLCK) + * 2.3 chainunlock(chainX, F_RDLCK) + * 2.4 callback(chainX.record1) + * 2.5 chainlock(chainX, F_RDLCK) + * 2.6 recordunlock(chainX.record1, F_RDLCK) + * 2.7 recordlock(chainX.record2, F_RDLCK) + * 2.8 chainunlock(chainX, F_RDLCK) + * 2.9 callback(chainX.record2) + * 2.10 chainlock(chainX, F_RDLCK) + * 2.11 recordunlock(chainX.record2, F_RDLCK) + * 2.12 chainunlock(chainX, F_RDLCK) + * 2.13 goto next chain + * + * So it has always one record locked in F_RDLCK mode and tries to + * get the 2nd one before it releases the first one. + * + * 3. prepare_commit tries to upgrade the allrecord lock to F_RWLCK + * If that happens at the time of 2.4, the operation of + * 2.5 may deadlock with the allrecord lock upgrade. + * On Linux step 2.5 works in order to make some progress with the + * locking, but on solaris it might fail because the kernel + * wants to satisfy the 1st lock requester before the 2nd one. + * + * I think the first step is a standalone test that does this: + * + * process1: F_RDLCK for ofs=0 len=2 + * process2: F_RDLCK for ofs=0 len=1 + * process1: upgrade ofs=0 len=2 to F_RWLCK (in blocking mode) + * process2: F_RDLCK for ofs=1 len=1 + * process2: unlock ofs=0 len=2 + * process1: should continue at that point + * + * Such a test follows here... + */ + +static int raw_fcntl_lock(int fd, int rw, off_t off, off_t len, bool waitflag) +{ + struct flock fl; + int cmd; + fl.l_type = rw; + fl.l_whence = SEEK_SET; + fl.l_start = off; + fl.l_len = len; + fl.l_pid = 0; + + cmd = waitflag ? F_SETLKW : F_SETLK; + + return fcntl(fd, cmd, &fl); +} + +static int raw_fcntl_unlock(int fd, off_t off, off_t len) +{ + struct flock fl; + fl.l_type = F_UNLCK; + fl.l_whence = SEEK_SET; + fl.l_start = off; + fl.l_len = len; + fl.l_pid = 0; + + return fcntl(fd, F_SETLKW, &fl); +} + + +int pipe_r; +int pipe_w; +char buf[2]; + +static void expect_char(char c) +{ + read(pipe_r, buf, 1); + if (*buf != c) { + fail("We were expecting %c, but got %c", c, buf[0]); + } +} + +static void send_char(char c) +{ + write(pipe_w, &c, 1); +} + + +int main(int argc, char *argv[]) +{ + int process; + int fd; + const char *filename = "run-fcntl-deadlock.lck"; + int pid; + int pipes_1_2[2]; + int pipes_2_1[2]; + int ret; + + pipe(pipes_1_2); + pipe(pipes_2_1); + fd = open(filename, O_RDWR | O_CREAT, 0755); + + pid = fork(); + if (pid == 0) { + pipe_r = pipes_1_2[0]; + pipe_w = pipes_2_1[1]; + process = 2; + alarm(15); + } else { + pipe_r = pipes_2_1[0]; + pipe_w = pipes_1_2[1]; + process = 1; + alarm(15); + } + + /* a: process1: F_RDLCK for ofs=0 len=2 */ + if (process == 1) { + ret = raw_fcntl_lock(fd, F_RDLCK, 0, 2, true); + ok(ret == 0, + "process 1 lock ofs=0 len=2: %d - %s", + ret, strerror(errno)); + diag("process 1 took read lock on range 0,2"); + send_char('a'); + } + + /* process2: F_RDLCK for ofs=0 len=1 */ + if (process == 2) { + expect_char('a'); + ret = raw_fcntl_lock(fd, F_RDLCK, 0, 1, true); + ok(ret == 0, + "process 2 lock ofs=0 len=1: %d - %s", + ret, strerror(errno));; + diag("process 2 took read lock on range 0,1"); + send_char('b'); + } + + /* process1: upgrade ofs=0 len=2 to F_RWLCK (in blocking mode) */ + if (process == 1) { + expect_char('b'); + send_char('c'); + diag("process 1 starts upgrade on range 0,2"); + ret = raw_fcntl_lock(fd, F_WRLCK, 0, 2, true); + ok(ret == 0, + "process 1 RW lock ofs=0 len=2: %d - %s", + ret, strerror(errno)); + diag("process 1 got read upgrade done"); + /* at this point process 1 is blocked on 2 releasing the + read lock */ + } + + /* + * process2: F_RDLCK for ofs=1 len=1 + * process2: unlock ofs=0 len=2 + */ + if (process == 2) { + expect_char('c'); /* we know process 1 is *about* to lock */ + sleep(1); + ret = raw_fcntl_lock(fd, F_RDLCK, 1, 1, true); + ok(ret == 0, + "process 2 lock ofs=1 len=1: %d - %s", + ret, strerror(errno)); + diag("process 2 got read lock on 1,1\n"); + ret = raw_fcntl_unlock(fd, 0, 2); + ok(ret == 0, + "process 2 unlock ofs=0 len=2: %d - %s", + ret, strerror(errno)); + diag("process 2 released read lock on 0,2\n"); + sleep(1); + send_char('d'); + } + + if (process == 1) { + expect_char('d'); + } + + diag("process %d has got to the end\n", process); + + return 0; +} |