1*4882a593Smuzhiyun======================================== 2*4882a593SmuzhiyunA description of what robust futexes are 3*4882a593Smuzhiyun======================================== 4*4882a593Smuzhiyun 5*4882a593Smuzhiyun:Started by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com> 6*4882a593Smuzhiyun 7*4882a593SmuzhiyunBackground 8*4882a593Smuzhiyun---------- 9*4882a593Smuzhiyun 10*4882a593Smuzhiyunwhat are robust futexes? To answer that, we first need to understand 11*4882a593Smuzhiyunwhat futexes are: normal futexes are special types of locks that in the 12*4882a593Smuzhiyunnoncontended case can be acquired/released from userspace without having 13*4882a593Smuzhiyunto enter the kernel. 14*4882a593Smuzhiyun 15*4882a593SmuzhiyunA futex is in essence a user-space address, e.g. a 32-bit lock variable 16*4882a593Smuzhiyunfield. If userspace notices contention (the lock is already owned and 17*4882a593Smuzhiyunsomeone else wants to grab it too) then the lock is marked with a value 18*4882a593Smuzhiyunthat says "there's a waiter pending", and the sys_futex(FUTEX_WAIT) 19*4882a593Smuzhiyunsyscall is used to wait for the other guy to release it. The kernel 20*4882a593Smuzhiyuncreates a 'futex queue' internally, so that it can later on match up the 21*4882a593Smuzhiyunwaiter with the waker - without them having to know about each other. 22*4882a593SmuzhiyunWhen the owner thread releases the futex, it notices (via the variable 23*4882a593Smuzhiyunvalue) that there were waiter(s) pending, and does the 24*4882a593Smuzhiyunsys_futex(FUTEX_WAKE) syscall to wake them up. Once all waiters have 25*4882a593Smuzhiyuntaken and released the lock, the futex is again back to 'uncontended' 26*4882a593Smuzhiyunstate, and there's no in-kernel state associated with it. The kernel 27*4882a593Smuzhiyuncompletely forgets that there ever was a futex at that address. This 28*4882a593Smuzhiyunmethod makes futexes very lightweight and scalable. 29*4882a593Smuzhiyun 30*4882a593Smuzhiyun"Robustness" is about dealing with crashes while holding a lock: if a 31*4882a593Smuzhiyunprocess exits prematurely while holding a pthread_mutex_t lock that is 32*4882a593Smuzhiyunalso shared with some other process (e.g. yum segfaults while holding a 33*4882a593Smuzhiyunpthread_mutex_t, or yum is kill -9-ed), then waiters for that lock need 34*4882a593Smuzhiyunto be notified that the last owner of the lock exited in some irregular 35*4882a593Smuzhiyunway. 36*4882a593Smuzhiyun 37*4882a593SmuzhiyunTo solve such types of problems, "robust mutex" userspace APIs were 38*4882a593Smuzhiyuncreated: pthread_mutex_lock() returns an error value if the owner exits 39*4882a593Smuzhiyunprematurely - and the new owner can decide whether the data protected by 40*4882a593Smuzhiyunthe lock can be recovered safely. 41*4882a593Smuzhiyun 42*4882a593SmuzhiyunThere is a big conceptual problem with futex based mutexes though: it is 43*4882a593Smuzhiyunthe kernel that destroys the owner task (e.g. due to a SEGFAULT), but 44*4882a593Smuzhiyunthe kernel cannot help with the cleanup: if there is no 'futex queue' 45*4882a593Smuzhiyun(and in most cases there is none, futexes being fast lightweight locks) 46*4882a593Smuzhiyunthen the kernel has no information to clean up after the held lock! 47*4882a593SmuzhiyunUserspace has no chance to clean up after the lock either - userspace is 48*4882a593Smuzhiyunthe one that crashes, so it has no opportunity to clean up. Catch-22. 49*4882a593Smuzhiyun 50*4882a593SmuzhiyunIn practice, when e.g. yum is kill -9-ed (or segfaults), a system reboot 51*4882a593Smuzhiyunis needed to release that futex based lock. This is one of the leading 52*4882a593Smuzhiyunbugreports against yum. 53*4882a593Smuzhiyun 54*4882a593SmuzhiyunTo solve this problem, the traditional approach was to extend the vma 55*4882a593Smuzhiyun(virtual memory area descriptor) concept to have a notion of 'pending 56*4882a593Smuzhiyunrobust futexes attached to this area'. This approach requires 3 new 57*4882a593Smuzhiyunsyscall variants to sys_futex(): FUTEX_REGISTER, FUTEX_DEREGISTER and 58*4882a593SmuzhiyunFUTEX_RECOVER. At do_exit() time, all vmas are searched to see whether 59*4882a593Smuzhiyunthey have a robust_head set. This approach has two fundamental problems 60*4882a593Smuzhiyunleft: 61*4882a593Smuzhiyun 62*4882a593Smuzhiyun - it has quite complex locking and race scenarios. The vma-based 63*4882a593Smuzhiyun approach had been pending for years, but they are still not completely 64*4882a593Smuzhiyun reliable. 65*4882a593Smuzhiyun 66*4882a593Smuzhiyun - they have to scan _every_ vma at sys_exit() time, per thread! 67*4882a593Smuzhiyun 68*4882a593SmuzhiyunThe second disadvantage is a real killer: pthread_exit() takes around 1 69*4882a593Smuzhiyunmicrosecond on Linux, but with thousands (or tens of thousands) of vmas 70*4882a593Smuzhiyunevery pthread_exit() takes a millisecond or more, also totally 71*4882a593Smuzhiyundestroying the CPU's L1 and L2 caches! 72*4882a593Smuzhiyun 73*4882a593SmuzhiyunThis is very much noticeable even for normal process sys_exit_group() 74*4882a593Smuzhiyuncalls: the kernel has to do the vma scanning unconditionally! (this is 75*4882a593Smuzhiyunbecause the kernel has no knowledge about how many robust futexes there 76*4882a593Smuzhiyunare to be cleaned up, because a robust futex might have been registered 77*4882a593Smuzhiyunin another task, and the futex variable might have been simply mmap()-ed 78*4882a593Smuzhiyuninto this process's address space). 79*4882a593Smuzhiyun 80*4882a593SmuzhiyunThis huge overhead forced the creation of CONFIG_FUTEX_ROBUST so that 81*4882a593Smuzhiyunnormal kernels can turn it off, but worse than that: the overhead makes 82*4882a593Smuzhiyunrobust futexes impractical for any type of generic Linux distribution. 83*4882a593Smuzhiyun 84*4882a593SmuzhiyunSo something had to be done. 85*4882a593Smuzhiyun 86*4882a593SmuzhiyunNew approach to robust futexes 87*4882a593Smuzhiyun------------------------------ 88*4882a593Smuzhiyun 89*4882a593SmuzhiyunAt the heart of this new approach there is a per-thread private list of 90*4882a593Smuzhiyunrobust locks that userspace is holding (maintained by glibc) - which 91*4882a593Smuzhiyunuserspace list is registered with the kernel via a new syscall [this 92*4882a593Smuzhiyunregistration happens at most once per thread lifetime]. At do_exit() 93*4882a593Smuzhiyuntime, the kernel checks this user-space list: are there any robust futex 94*4882a593Smuzhiyunlocks to be cleaned up? 95*4882a593Smuzhiyun 96*4882a593SmuzhiyunIn the common case, at do_exit() time, there is no list registered, so 97*4882a593Smuzhiyunthe cost of robust futexes is just a simple current->robust_list != NULL 98*4882a593Smuzhiyuncomparison. If the thread has registered a list, then normally the list 99*4882a593Smuzhiyunis empty. If the thread/process crashed or terminated in some incorrect 100*4882a593Smuzhiyunway then the list might be non-empty: in this case the kernel carefully 101*4882a593Smuzhiyunwalks the list [not trusting it], and marks all locks that are owned by 102*4882a593Smuzhiyunthis thread with the FUTEX_OWNER_DIED bit, and wakes up one waiter (if 103*4882a593Smuzhiyunany). 104*4882a593Smuzhiyun 105*4882a593SmuzhiyunThe list is guaranteed to be private and per-thread at do_exit() time, 106*4882a593Smuzhiyunso it can be accessed by the kernel in a lockless way. 107*4882a593Smuzhiyun 108*4882a593SmuzhiyunThere is one race possible though: since adding to and removing from the 109*4882a593Smuzhiyunlist is done after the futex is acquired by glibc, there is a few 110*4882a593Smuzhiyuninstructions window for the thread (or process) to die there, leaving 111*4882a593Smuzhiyunthe futex hung. To protect against this possibility, userspace (glibc) 112*4882a593Smuzhiyunalso maintains a simple per-thread 'list_op_pending' field, to allow the 113*4882a593Smuzhiyunkernel to clean up if the thread dies after acquiring the lock, but just 114*4882a593Smuzhiyunbefore it could have added itself to the list. Glibc sets this 115*4882a593Smuzhiyunlist_op_pending field before it tries to acquire the futex, and clears 116*4882a593Smuzhiyunit after the list-add (or list-remove) has finished. 117*4882a593Smuzhiyun 118*4882a593SmuzhiyunThat's all that is needed - all the rest of robust-futex cleanup is done 119*4882a593Smuzhiyunin userspace [just like with the previous patches]. 120*4882a593Smuzhiyun 121*4882a593SmuzhiyunUlrich Drepper has implemented the necessary glibc support for this new 122*4882a593Smuzhiyunmechanism, which fully enables robust mutexes. 123*4882a593Smuzhiyun 124*4882a593SmuzhiyunKey differences of this userspace-list based approach, compared to the 125*4882a593Smuzhiyunvma based method: 126*4882a593Smuzhiyun 127*4882a593Smuzhiyun - it's much, much faster: at thread exit time, there's no need to loop 128*4882a593Smuzhiyun over every vma (!), which the VM-based method has to do. Only a very 129*4882a593Smuzhiyun simple 'is the list empty' op is done. 130*4882a593Smuzhiyun 131*4882a593Smuzhiyun - no VM changes are needed - 'struct address_space' is left alone. 132*4882a593Smuzhiyun 133*4882a593Smuzhiyun - no registration of individual locks is needed: robust mutexes don't 134*4882a593Smuzhiyun need any extra per-lock syscalls. Robust mutexes thus become a very 135*4882a593Smuzhiyun lightweight primitive - so they don't force the application designer 136*4882a593Smuzhiyun to do a hard choice between performance and robustness - robust 137*4882a593Smuzhiyun mutexes are just as fast. 138*4882a593Smuzhiyun 139*4882a593Smuzhiyun - no per-lock kernel allocation happens. 140*4882a593Smuzhiyun 141*4882a593Smuzhiyun - no resource limits are needed. 142*4882a593Smuzhiyun 143*4882a593Smuzhiyun - no kernel-space recovery call (FUTEX_RECOVER) is needed. 144*4882a593Smuzhiyun 145*4882a593Smuzhiyun - the implementation and the locking is "obvious", and there are no 146*4882a593Smuzhiyun interactions with the VM. 147*4882a593Smuzhiyun 148*4882a593SmuzhiyunPerformance 149*4882a593Smuzhiyun----------- 150*4882a593Smuzhiyun 151*4882a593SmuzhiyunI have benchmarked the time needed for the kernel to process a list of 1 152*4882a593Smuzhiyunmillion (!) held locks, using the new method [on a 2GHz CPU]: 153*4882a593Smuzhiyun 154*4882a593Smuzhiyun - with FUTEX_WAIT set [contended mutex]: 130 msecs 155*4882a593Smuzhiyun - without FUTEX_WAIT set [uncontended mutex]: 30 msecs 156*4882a593Smuzhiyun 157*4882a593SmuzhiyunI have also measured an approach where glibc does the lock notification 158*4882a593Smuzhiyun[which it currently does for !pshared robust mutexes], and that took 256 159*4882a593Smuzhiyunmsecs - clearly slower, due to the 1 million FUTEX_WAKE syscalls 160*4882a593Smuzhiyunuserspace had to do. 161*4882a593Smuzhiyun 162*4882a593Smuzhiyun(1 million held locks are unheard of - we expect at most a handful of 163*4882a593Smuzhiyunlocks to be held at a time. Nevertheless it's nice to know that this 164*4882a593Smuzhiyunapproach scales nicely.) 165*4882a593Smuzhiyun 166*4882a593SmuzhiyunImplementation details 167*4882a593Smuzhiyun---------------------- 168*4882a593Smuzhiyun 169*4882a593SmuzhiyunThe patch adds two new syscalls: one to register the userspace list, and 170*4882a593Smuzhiyunone to query the registered list pointer:: 171*4882a593Smuzhiyun 172*4882a593Smuzhiyun asmlinkage long 173*4882a593Smuzhiyun sys_set_robust_list(struct robust_list_head __user *head, 174*4882a593Smuzhiyun size_t len); 175*4882a593Smuzhiyun 176*4882a593Smuzhiyun asmlinkage long 177*4882a593Smuzhiyun sys_get_robust_list(int pid, struct robust_list_head __user **head_ptr, 178*4882a593Smuzhiyun size_t __user *len_ptr); 179*4882a593Smuzhiyun 180*4882a593SmuzhiyunList registration is very fast: the pointer is simply stored in 181*4882a593Smuzhiyuncurrent->robust_list. [Note that in the future, if robust futexes become 182*4882a593Smuzhiyunwidespread, we could extend sys_clone() to register a robust-list head 183*4882a593Smuzhiyunfor new threads, without the need of another syscall.] 184*4882a593Smuzhiyun 185*4882a593SmuzhiyunSo there is virtually zero overhead for tasks not using robust futexes, 186*4882a593Smuzhiyunand even for robust futex users, there is only one extra syscall per 187*4882a593Smuzhiyunthread lifetime, and the cleanup operation, if it happens, is fast and 188*4882a593Smuzhiyunstraightforward. The kernel doesn't have any internal distinction between 189*4882a593Smuzhiyunrobust and normal futexes. 190*4882a593Smuzhiyun 191*4882a593SmuzhiyunIf a futex is found to be held at exit time, the kernel sets the 192*4882a593Smuzhiyunfollowing bit of the futex word:: 193*4882a593Smuzhiyun 194*4882a593Smuzhiyun #define FUTEX_OWNER_DIED 0x40000000 195*4882a593Smuzhiyun 196*4882a593Smuzhiyunand wakes up the next futex waiter (if any). User-space does the rest of 197*4882a593Smuzhiyunthe cleanup. 198*4882a593Smuzhiyun 199*4882a593SmuzhiyunOtherwise, robust futexes are acquired by glibc by putting the TID into 200*4882a593Smuzhiyunthe futex field atomically. Waiters set the FUTEX_WAITERS bit:: 201*4882a593Smuzhiyun 202*4882a593Smuzhiyun #define FUTEX_WAITERS 0x80000000 203*4882a593Smuzhiyun 204*4882a593Smuzhiyunand the remaining bits are for the TID. 205*4882a593Smuzhiyun 206*4882a593SmuzhiyunTesting, architecture support 207*4882a593Smuzhiyun----------------------------- 208*4882a593Smuzhiyun 209*4882a593SmuzhiyunI've tested the new syscalls on x86 and x86_64, and have made sure the 210*4882a593Smuzhiyunparsing of the userspace list is robust [ ;-) ] even if the list is 211*4882a593Smuzhiyundeliberately corrupted. 212*4882a593Smuzhiyun 213*4882a593Smuzhiyuni386 and x86_64 syscalls are wired up at the moment, and Ulrich has 214*4882a593Smuzhiyuntested the new glibc code (on x86_64 and i386), and it works for his 215*4882a593Smuzhiyunrobust-mutex testcases. 216*4882a593Smuzhiyun 217*4882a593SmuzhiyunAll other architectures should build just fine too - but they won't have 218*4882a593Smuzhiyunthe new syscalls yet. 219*4882a593Smuzhiyun 220*4882a593SmuzhiyunArchitectures need to implement the new futex_atomic_cmpxchg_inatomic() 221*4882a593Smuzhiyuninline function before writing up the syscalls. 222