RFR 6307456 : UnixFileSystem_md.c use of chmod() and access() should handle EINTR signal appropriately (unix)

Ivan Gerasimov ivan.gerasimov at oracle.com
Fri Mar 15 07:37:53 UTC 2019

Thank you David for the detailed analysis!

I'm having an impression that the general direction has been to add the 
RESTARTABLE loops where sensible.  (E.g. a recent fix for JDK-8197498, 
and lots of older similar bugs.)

I understand that the fix only touches a small portion of potentially 
problematic syscalls.

The intention was to cover UnixFileSystem_md.c and to close that ancient 
bug :)

With kind regards,

On 3/14/19 11:43 PM, David Holmes wrote:
> Hi Ivan,
> On 15/03/2019 11:42 am, Ivan Gerasimov wrote:
>> Thank you David!
>> On 3/14/19 4:48 PM, David Holmes wrote:
>>> Hi Ivan,
>>> This is an "ancient" bug that you are fixing. I don't think it is 
>>> valid.
>>> On 15/03/2019 3:29 am, Ivan Gerasimov wrote:
>>>> Hello!
>>>> Not all the man pages agree that chmod, access and statvfs64 can be 
>>>> interrupted, but at least on some platforms they are allowed to 
>>>> fail with EINTR:  chmod(2) on MacOS, access(2) on Solaris and 
>>>> statvfs(3) on Linux.
>>>> So, it would be more accurate to wrap these up into a RESTARTABLE 
>>>> loop.
>>> When Java threads are created, or native threads attach to the VM to 
>>> become Java threads, they all get a very specific signal-mask to 
>>> block most (non synchronous) signals. The signals that we install 
>>> handlers for in the VM are also configured with SA_RESTART. So 
>>> unless specifically specified as not honouring SA_RESTART we should 
>>> not need the RESTARTABLE loop.
>> But isn't it possible to install a custom signal handler through JNI, 
>> omitting SA_RESTART flag?
> It's possible - then you also have to update signal masks. But yes 
> possible.
>>> So I'm not clear exactly what signals we need to be guarding against 
>>> here, or whether this indicates some kind of (historic) mismatch 
>>> between the library and VM code?
>> grep shows that RESTARTABLE macro and its variants are used 
>> throughout hotspot and jdk code.
> Yes and on closer examination you will find a lot of inconsistencies. 
> RESTARTABLE goes back a long way and many of the I/O APIs have 
> switched locations over the years. Stuff was copied from the HPI layer 
> into hotspot, then back to the JDK and sometimes things were copied 
> with RESTARTABLE and sometimes not; and sometimes ports were written 
> that copied RESTARTABLE and sometimes not; and sometime new APIs were 
> added that were RESTARTABLE and sometimes not. All in all a bit of a 
> mess.
> For example here are some uses of write in JDK libs:
> ./share/native/libzip/zlib/gzwrite.c:                writ = 
> write(state->fd, state->x.next, put);
> ./unix/native/libnio/ch/IOUtil.c:    return convertReturnVal(env, 
> write(fd, &c, 1), JNI_FALSE);
> ./unix/native/libnio/ch/FileDispatcherImpl.c:    return 
> convertReturnVal(env, write(fd, buf, len), JNI_FALSE);
> ./unix/native/libnio/fs/UnixCopyFile.c: RESTARTABLE(write((int)dst, 
> bufp, len), n);
> ./unix/native/libnio/fs/UnixNativeDispatcher.c: 
> RESTARTABLE(write((int)fd, bufp, (size_t)nbytes), n)
> ./unix/native/libjava/ProcessImpl_md.c: write(c->childenv[1], (char 
> *)&magic, sizeof(magic)); // magic number first
> ./unix/native/libjava/io_util_md.c:    RESTARTABLE(write(fd, buf, 
> len), result);
> A mix of RESTARTABLE and not.
>> If it were possible to guarantee that no syscalls are ever 
>> interrupted, it would surely be much cleaner to remove all these 
>> wrappers and loops.
> There is no guarantee as you note - someone could install their own 
> handler for SIGUSR1 (not used by the VM) for example and not use 
> SA_RESTART and cause unexpected EINTR.
> But that problem could arise today in many different places not just 
> the couple you are changing here.
> So it comes down to a basic question of signal handling philosophy: do 
> we expect/require SA_RESTART to always be used, or do we always guard 
> against EINTR? The Go folk had a similar choice:
> https://github.com/golang/go/issues/20400
> We're kind of in a messy undecided state. We use SA_RESTART ourselves 
> but don't document its need for others to use, nor do we enforce its 
> use even through libjsig (for signal chaining). We use RESTARTABLE in 
> some places but not in others.
> So yeah feel free to make these changes, just realize they are only 
> one part of a larger problem (if we intend to allow no SA_RESTART).
> Cheers,
> David
>> With kind regards,
>> Ivan
>>> Thanks,
>>> David
>>> -----
>>>> Also, java_io_UnixFileSystem_list was tiny-optimized to avoid 
>>>> unnecessary reallocation.
>>>> Would you please help review the fix?
>>>> BUGURL: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-6307456
>>>> WEBREV: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~igerasim/6307456/00/webrev/
>>>> Thanks in advance!

With kind regards,
Ivan Gerasimov

More information about the core-libs-dev mailing list