Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2013 22:39:51 +0200 From: Jilles Tjoelker <jilles@stack.nl> To: Konstantin Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com> Cc: Tijl Coosemans <tijl@coosemans.org>, Russ Cox <rsc@swtch.com>, freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: restarting SYSCALL system call on amd64 loses arguments Message-ID: <20130924203951.GB12607@stack.nl> In-Reply-To: <20130924192909.GO41229@kib.kiev.ua> References: <20130923222613.548860a3@kalimero.tijl.coosemans.org> <20130923213730.GX41229@kib.kiev.ua> <20130924191949.GA12607@stack.nl> <20130924192909.GO41229@kib.kiev.ua>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 10:29:09PM +0300, Konstantin Belousov wrote: > On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 09:19:49PM +0200, Jilles Tjoelker wrote: > > On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 12:37:30AM +0300, Konstantin Belousov wrote: > > > On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 10:26:13PM +0200, Tijl Coosemans wrote: > > > > Has anyone taken a look at this PR yet? > > > > http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=182161 > > > This looks like a valid bug, but probably not a valid testcase. > > > Let me elaborate. When a signal is delivered, return from the signal > > > handler is performed by the sigreturn(2), which reloads the whole > > > register file when crossing kernel->user boundary due to sys_sigreturn(9) > > > setting PCB_FULL_IRET flag. As result, the whole trap frame at the > > > time of the syscall entry is restored, and ERESTART return is not > > > exercised. > > > I was not able to reproduce the issue with the supplied test program > > > on HEAD. I suspect that the program actually exposed the bug in the > > > signal delivery in the threaded processes, which I introduced for 9.1 > > > and fixed in r251047 & r251365. > > The ERESTART return happens if there is no signal or no longer a signal. > > The latter is how the bug in the PR occurs: a SIGCHLD delivery via > > handler in one thread races with a SIGCHLD acceptance in wait4() in > > another thread. Note wait4() returning a value in the other thread in > > the fourth line of the kdump output in the PR. > > For some reason, I can reproduce this easily on my local quad-core > > r255729 stable/9 system but not on ref9-amd64.freebsd.org or > > ref10-amd64.freebsd.org. > > I can also reproduce the bug on my local system by racing signal > > delivery via handler with acceptance in sigtimedwait(). > So, could you, please, check the r255844 on your machine ? I cannot reproduce it with that (patch applied to stable/9 kernel). The test programs run fine for minutes. -- Jilles Tjoelker
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20130924203951.GB12607>