Bug 58423 - Race condition of metadata.c (mono_metadata_get_canonical_generic_inst)
Summary: Race condition of metadata.c (mono_metadata_get_canonical_generic_inst)
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Alias: None
Product: Runtime
Classification: Mono
Component: General (show other bugs)
Version: unspecified
Hardware: PC Linux
: --- normal
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Armin
URL:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2017-07-26 22:51 UTC by Armin
Modified: 2017-09-07 12:38 UTC (History)
4 users (show)

Tags:
Is this bug a regression?: ---
Last known good build:


Attachments
Stack trace (23.28 KB, text/plain)
2017-07-26 22:51 UTC, Armin
Details


Notice (2018-05-24): bugzilla.xamarin.com is now in read-only mode.

Please join us on Visual Studio Developer Community and in the Xamarin and Mono organizations on GitHub to continue tracking issues. Bugzilla will remain available for reference in read-only mode. We will continue to work on open Bugzilla bugs, copy them to the new locations as needed for follow-up, and add the new items under Related Links.

Our sincere thanks to everyone who has contributed on this bug tracker over the years. Thanks also for your understanding as we make these adjustments and improvements for the future.


Please create a new report on GitHub or Developer Community with your current version information, steps to reproduce, and relevant error messages or log files if you are hitting an issue that looks similar to this resolved bug and you do not yet see a matching new report.

Related Links:
Status:
RESOLVED FIXED

Description Armin 2017-07-26 22:51:02 UTC
Created attachment 23830 [details]
Stack trace

If I understand this TSan report correctly, different threads execute `++next_generic_inst_id` (3 ops) "without" mutexes. Yes, there are mutexes but, as it seems, different ones are used. Shouldn't a global lock be used here instead of `mono_image_set_lock (set)` which is dependent on `set`?

I found this with commit 5d9d139e0ac4ecbf02c70cbce5d9a0c65a43faa4, highlighted the affected row with "!" and attached the corresponding stack trace with all the details.

static int next_generic_inst_id = 0;

MonoGenericInst * mono_metadata_get_canonical_generic_inst (MonoGenericInst *candidate) {
  // ...
  mono_image_set_lock (set);
  // ...
#ifndef MONO_SMALL_CONFIG
! ginst->id = ++next_generic_inst_id;
#endif
  // ...
  mono_image_set_unlock (set);
  // ...
}
Comment 1 Ludovic Henry 2017-07-28 17:42:30 UTC
Aleksey, does it matter if this `next_generic_inst_id` is not automatically incremented? If it does matter, should we replace `++next_generic_inst_id` with `InterlockedIncrement(&next_generic_inst_id)`?
Comment 2 Aleksey Kliger 2017-07-28 18:08:07 UTC
It looks to me like the id field in a MonoGenericInst is used in mono_generic_inst_equal_full as a way to short-circuit comparisons.

So yea in principle you could end up with two instantiations of the same class that are instantiated into two separate image sets at the same time but end up with the same id.  This will later cause mono_metadata_type_equal to return the wrong answer.
Comment 3 Armin 2017-07-29 11:59:01 UTC
Should I add `InterlockedIncrement` with a quick PR?
Comment 4 Ludovic Henry 2017-07-31 14:22:07 UTC
Armin, a fix for that wouldn't hurt IMO, so feel free to submit a PR, and add Aleksey and I as reviewers please. Thank you.
Comment 5 Ludovic Henry 2017-09-07 12:38:31 UTC
Fixed with 47535f557d18cf771436ac55578dfb165da0e399