On Tue, 22 Nov 2022 09:11:44 GMT, Per Minborg <pminb...@openjdk.org> wrote:

>> This PR proposes the introduction of **guarding** of the use of 
>> `DirectBuffer::address` within the JDK. With the introduction of the Foreign 
>> Function and Memory access, it is possible to derive Buffer instances that 
>> are backed by native memory that, in turn, can be closed asynchronously by 
>> the user (and not only via a `Cleaner` when there is no other reference to 
>> the `Buffer` object). If another thread is invoking `MemorySession::close` 
>> while a thread is doing work using raw addresses, the outcome is undefined. 
>> This means the JVM might crash or even worse, silent modification of 
>> unrelated memory might occur. 
>> 
>> Design choices in this PR:
>> 
>> There is already a method `MemorySession::whileAlive` that takes a runnable 
>> and that will perform the provided action while acquiring the underlying` 
>> MemorySession` (if any). However, using this method entailed relatively 
>> large changes while converting larger/nested code segments into lambdas. 
>> This would also risk introducing lambda capturing. So, instead, a 
>> try-with-resources friendly access method was added. This made is more easy 
>> to add guarding and did not risk lambda capturing. Also, introducing lambdas 
>> in certain fundamental JDK classes might incur bootstrap problems.
>> 
>> The aforementioned TwR is using a "session acquisition" that is not used 
>> explicitly in the try block itself. This raises a warning that is suppressed 
>> using `@SuppressWarnings("try")`. In the future, we might be able to remove 
>> these suppressions by using the reserved variable name `_`. Another 
>> alternative was evaluated where a non-autocloseable resource was used. 
>> However, it became relatively complicated to guarantee that the session was 
>> always released and, at the same time, the existing 'final` block was always 
>> executed properly (as they both might throw exceptions). In the end, the 
>> proposed solution was much simpler and robust despite requiring a 
>> non-referenced TwR variable.
>> 
>> In some cases, where is is guaranteed that the backing memory session is 
>> non-closeable, we do not have to guard the use of `DirectBuffer::address`. 
>> ~~These cases have been documented in the code.~~
>> 
>> On some occasions, a plurality of acquisitions are made. This would never 
>> lead to deadlocks as acquisitions are fundamentally concurrent counters and 
>> not resources that only one thread can "own".
>> 
>> I have added comments (and not javadocs) before the declaration of the 
>> non-public-api `DirectBuffer::address` method, that the use of the returned 
>> address needs to be guarded. It can be discussed if this is preferable or 
>> not.
>> 
>> This PR spawns several areas of responsibility and so, I expect more than 
>> one reviewer before promoting the PR.
>
> Per Minborg has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional 
> commit since the last revision:
> 
>   Rework Acquisition

src/java.base/share/classes/com/sun/crypto/provider/GaloisCounterMode.java line 
914:

> 912:          * If so, make a copy to put the dst data in.
> 913:          */
> 914:         @SuppressWarnings("try")

After looking at the implementation some more, I'm not sure this need fixing? 
E.g. this method is just using the address to compute some overlap - and return 
a buffer sliced accordingly. There's no access to the buffer data (except for 
the last part which does a `put`). The access will fail if the session is 
closed from underneath. I don't think this can crash the VM (in fact this code 
did not have a reachability fence to begin with).

src/java.base/share/classes/java/nio/Buffer.java line 827:

> 825: 
> 826:                 @Override
> 827:                 public Runnable acquireSessionOrNull(Buffer buffer, 
> boolean async) {

If allocation/performance is an issue, a relatively straightforward way to 
adjust the code would be to let go of the TWR entirely. E.g. we have code that 
does this:


Buffer b = ...
try {
    // use buffer.address();
} finally {
    Reference.reachabilityFence(b);
}


We could transform to this:


Buffer b = ...
acquire(b); // calls MemorySessionImpl.acquire0 if session is not null
try {
    // use buffer.address();
} finally {
    release(b); // calls MemorySessionImpl.release0 if session is not null (and 
maybe adds a reachability fence, just in case)
}

This leads to a simpler patch that is probably easier to validate. The 
remaining IOUtil code will be using a different idiom, and perhaps we can, at 
some point, go back and make that consistent too.

src/jdk.sctp/unix/classes/sun/nio/ch/sctp/SctpMultiChannelImpl.java line 590:

> 588:                                         int pos)
> 589:             throws IOException {
> 590:         try (var guard = NIO_ACCESS.acquireScope(bb)) {

Why was the old code not using reachability fences? Bug or feature?

-------------

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/11260

Reply via email to