Commit | Line | Data |
---|---|---|
2eec9ad9 IM |
1 | Started by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com> |
2 | ||
3 | Background | |
4 | ---------- | |
5 | ||
6 | what are robust futexes? To answer that, we first need to understand | |
7 | what futexes are: normal futexes are special types of locks that in the | |
8 | noncontended case can be acquired/released from userspace without having | |
9 | to enter the kernel. | |
10 | ||
11 | A futex is in essence a user-space address, e.g. a 32-bit lock variable | |
12 | field. If userspace notices contention (the lock is already owned and | |
13 | someone else wants to grab it too) then the lock is marked with a value | |
14 | that says "there's a waiter pending", and the sys_futex(FUTEX_WAIT) | |
15 | syscall is used to wait for the other guy to release it. The kernel | |
16 | creates a 'futex queue' internally, so that it can later on match up the | |
17 | waiter with the waker - without them having to know about each other. | |
18 | When the owner thread releases the futex, it notices (via the variable | |
19 | value) that there were waiter(s) pending, and does the | |
20 | sys_futex(FUTEX_WAKE) syscall to wake them up. Once all waiters have | |
21 | taken and released the lock, the futex is again back to 'uncontended' | |
22 | state, and there's no in-kernel state associated with it. The kernel | |
23 | completely forgets that there ever was a futex at that address. This | |
24 | method makes futexes very lightweight and scalable. | |
25 | ||
26 | "Robustness" is about dealing with crashes while holding a lock: if a | |
27 | process exits prematurely while holding a pthread_mutex_t lock that is | |
28 | also shared with some other process (e.g. yum segfaults while holding a | |
29 | pthread_mutex_t, or yum is kill -9-ed), then waiters for that lock need | |
30 | to be notified that the last owner of the lock exited in some irregular | |
31 | way. | |
32 | ||
33 | To solve such types of problems, "robust mutex" userspace APIs were | |
34 | created: pthread_mutex_lock() returns an error value if the owner exits | |
35 | prematurely - and the new owner can decide whether the data protected by | |
36 | the lock can be recovered safely. | |
37 | ||
38 | There is a big conceptual problem with futex based mutexes though: it is | |
39 | the kernel that destroys the owner task (e.g. due to a SEGFAULT), but | |
40 | the kernel cannot help with the cleanup: if there is no 'futex queue' | |
41 | (and in most cases there is none, futexes being fast lightweight locks) | |
42 | then the kernel has no information to clean up after the held lock! | |
43 | Userspace has no chance to clean up after the lock either - userspace is | |
44 | the one that crashes, so it has no opportunity to clean up. Catch-22. | |
45 | ||
46 | In practice, when e.g. yum is kill -9-ed (or segfaults), a system reboot | |
47 | is needed to release that futex based lock. This is one of the leading | |
48 | bugreports against yum. | |
49 | ||
50 | To solve this problem, the traditional approach was to extend the vma | |
51 | (virtual memory area descriptor) concept to have a notion of 'pending | |
52 | robust futexes attached to this area'. This approach requires 3 new | |
53 | syscall variants to sys_futex(): FUTEX_REGISTER, FUTEX_DEREGISTER and | |
54 | FUTEX_RECOVER. At do_exit() time, all vmas are searched to see whether | |
55 | they have a robust_head set. This approach has two fundamental problems | |
56 | left: | |
57 | ||
58 | - it has quite complex locking and race scenarios. The vma-based | |
59 | approach had been pending for years, but they are still not completely | |
60 | reliable. | |
61 | ||
62 | - they have to scan _every_ vma at sys_exit() time, per thread! | |
63 | ||
64 | The second disadvantage is a real killer: pthread_exit() takes around 1 | |
65 | microsecond on Linux, but with thousands (or tens of thousands) of vmas | |
66 | every pthread_exit() takes a millisecond or more, also totally | |
67 | destroying the CPU's L1 and L2 caches! | |
68 | ||
69 | This is very much noticeable even for normal process sys_exit_group() | |
70 | calls: the kernel has to do the vma scanning unconditionally! (this is | |
71 | because the kernel has no knowledge about how many robust futexes there | |
72 | are to be cleaned up, because a robust futex might have been registered | |
73 | in another task, and the futex variable might have been simply mmap()-ed | |
74 | into this process's address space). | |
75 | ||
76 | This huge overhead forced the creation of CONFIG_FUTEX_ROBUST so that | |
77 | normal kernels can turn it off, but worse than that: the overhead makes | |
78 | robust futexes impractical for any type of generic Linux distribution. | |
79 | ||
80 | So something had to be done. | |
81 | ||
82 | New approach to robust futexes | |
83 | ------------------------------ | |
84 | ||
85 | At the heart of this new approach there is a per-thread private list of | |
86 | robust locks that userspace is holding (maintained by glibc) - which | |
87 | userspace list is registered with the kernel via a new syscall [this | |
88 | registration happens at most once per thread lifetime]. At do_exit() | |
89 | time, the kernel checks this user-space list: are there any robust futex | |
90 | locks to be cleaned up? | |
91 | ||
92 | In the common case, at do_exit() time, there is no list registered, so | |
93 | the cost of robust futexes is just a simple current->robust_list != NULL | |
94 | comparison. If the thread has registered a list, then normally the list | |
95 | is empty. If the thread/process crashed or terminated in some incorrect | |
96 | way then the list might be non-empty: in this case the kernel carefully | |
97 | walks the list [not trusting it], and marks all locks that are owned by | |
6abdce76 | 98 | this thread with the FUTEX_OWNER_DIED bit, and wakes up one waiter (if |
2eec9ad9 IM |
99 | any). |
100 | ||
101 | The list is guaranteed to be private and per-thread at do_exit() time, | |
102 | so it can be accessed by the kernel in a lockless way. | |
103 | ||
104 | There is one race possible though: since adding to and removing from the | |
105 | list is done after the futex is acquired by glibc, there is a few | |
106 | instructions window for the thread (or process) to die there, leaving | |
107 | the futex hung. To protect against this possibility, userspace (glibc) | |
108 | also maintains a simple per-thread 'list_op_pending' field, to allow the | |
109 | kernel to clean up if the thread dies after acquiring the lock, but just | |
110 | before it could have added itself to the list. Glibc sets this | |
111 | list_op_pending field before it tries to acquire the futex, and clears | |
112 | it after the list-add (or list-remove) has finished. | |
113 | ||
114 | That's all that is needed - all the rest of robust-futex cleanup is done | |
115 | in userspace [just like with the previous patches]. | |
116 | ||
117 | Ulrich Drepper has implemented the necessary glibc support for this new | |
118 | mechanism, which fully enables robust mutexes. | |
119 | ||
120 | Key differences of this userspace-list based approach, compared to the | |
121 | vma based method: | |
122 | ||
123 | - it's much, much faster: at thread exit time, there's no need to loop | |
124 | over every vma (!), which the VM-based method has to do. Only a very | |
125 | simple 'is the list empty' op is done. | |
126 | ||
127 | - no VM changes are needed - 'struct address_space' is left alone. | |
128 | ||
129 | - no registration of individual locks is needed: robust mutexes dont | |
130 | need any extra per-lock syscalls. Robust mutexes thus become a very | |
131 | lightweight primitive - so they dont force the application designer | |
132 | to do a hard choice between performance and robustness - robust | |
133 | mutexes are just as fast. | |
134 | ||
135 | - no per-lock kernel allocation happens. | |
136 | ||
137 | - no resource limits are needed. | |
138 | ||
139 | - no kernel-space recovery call (FUTEX_RECOVER) is needed. | |
140 | ||
141 | - the implementation and the locking is "obvious", and there are no | |
142 | interactions with the VM. | |
143 | ||
144 | Performance | |
145 | ----------- | |
146 | ||
147 | I have benchmarked the time needed for the kernel to process a list of 1 | |
148 | million (!) held locks, using the new method [on a 2GHz CPU]: | |
149 | ||
150 | - with FUTEX_WAIT set [contended mutex]: 130 msecs | |
151 | - without FUTEX_WAIT set [uncontended mutex]: 30 msecs | |
152 | ||
153 | I have also measured an approach where glibc does the lock notification | |
154 | [which it currently does for !pshared robust mutexes], and that took 256 | |
155 | msecs - clearly slower, due to the 1 million FUTEX_WAKE syscalls | |
156 | userspace had to do. | |
157 | ||
158 | (1 million held locks are unheard of - we expect at most a handful of | |
159 | locks to be held at a time. Nevertheless it's nice to know that this | |
160 | approach scales nicely.) | |
161 | ||
162 | Implementation details | |
163 | ---------------------- | |
164 | ||
165 | The patch adds two new syscalls: one to register the userspace list, and | |
166 | one to query the registered list pointer: | |
167 | ||
168 | asmlinkage long | |
169 | sys_set_robust_list(struct robust_list_head __user *head, | |
170 | size_t len); | |
171 | ||
172 | asmlinkage long | |
173 | sys_get_robust_list(int pid, struct robust_list_head __user **head_ptr, | |
174 | size_t __user *len_ptr); | |
175 | ||
176 | List registration is very fast: the pointer is simply stored in | |
177 | current->robust_list. [Note that in the future, if robust futexes become | |
178 | widespread, we could extend sys_clone() to register a robust-list head | |
179 | for new threads, without the need of another syscall.] | |
180 | ||
181 | So there is virtually zero overhead for tasks not using robust futexes, | |
182 | and even for robust futex users, there is only one extra syscall per | |
183 | thread lifetime, and the cleanup operation, if it happens, is fast and | |
5d3f083d | 184 | straightforward. The kernel doesn't have any internal distinction between |
2eec9ad9 IM |
185 | robust and normal futexes. |
186 | ||
187 | If a futex is found to be held at exit time, the kernel sets the | |
188 | following bit of the futex word: | |
189 | ||
190 | #define FUTEX_OWNER_DIED 0x40000000 | |
191 | ||
192 | and wakes up the next futex waiter (if any). User-space does the rest of | |
193 | the cleanup. | |
194 | ||
195 | Otherwise, robust futexes are acquired by glibc by putting the TID into | |
196 | the futex field atomically. Waiters set the FUTEX_WAITERS bit: | |
197 | ||
198 | #define FUTEX_WAITERS 0x80000000 | |
199 | ||
200 | and the remaining bits are for the TID. | |
201 | ||
202 | Testing, architecture support | |
203 | ----------------------------- | |
204 | ||
205 | i've tested the new syscalls on x86 and x86_64, and have made sure the | |
206 | parsing of the userspace list is robust [ ;-) ] even if the list is | |
207 | deliberately corrupted. | |
208 | ||
209 | i386 and x86_64 syscalls are wired up at the moment, and Ulrich has | |
210 | tested the new glibc code (on x86_64 and i386), and it works for his | |
211 | robust-mutex testcases. | |
212 | ||
213 | All other architectures should build just fine too - but they wont have | |
214 | the new syscalls yet. | |
215 | ||
8f17d3a5 | 216 | Architectures need to implement the new futex_atomic_cmpxchg_inatomic() |
2eec9ad9 IM |
217 | inline function before writing up the syscalls (that function returns |
218 | -ENOSYS right now). |