From: Matt Corallo Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2023 22:38:54 +0000 (+0000) Subject: Refuse recursive read locks in lockorder testing X-Git-Tag: v0.0.114-beta^2~3 X-Git-Url: http://git.bitcoin.ninja/index.cgi?a=commitdiff_plain;h=9c08fbd435b097c0aeec2843d8b4a6fdec06a8f0;p=rust-lightning Refuse recursive read locks in lockorder testing Our existing lockorder tests assume that a read lock on a thread that is already holding the same read lock is totally fine. This isn't at all true. The `std` `RwLock` behavior is platform-dependent - on most platforms readers can starve writers as readers will never block for a pending writer. However, on platforms where this is not the case, one thread trying to take a write lock may deadlock with another thread that both already has, and is attempting to take again, a read lock. Worse, our in-tree `FairRwLock` exhibits this behavior explicitly on all platforms to avoid the starvation issue. Thus, we shouldn't have any special handling for allowing recursive read locks, so we simply remove it here. --- diff --git a/lightning/src/ln/chanmon_update_fail_tests.rs b/lightning/src/ln/chanmon_update_fail_tests.rs index 1532884fa..4f174c226 100644 --- a/lightning/src/ln/chanmon_update_fail_tests.rs +++ b/lightning/src/ln/chanmon_update_fail_tests.rs @@ -1426,9 +1426,11 @@ fn monitor_failed_no_reestablish_response() { { let mut node_0_per_peer_lock; let mut node_0_peer_state_lock; + get_channel_ref!(nodes[0], nodes[1], node_0_per_peer_lock, node_0_peer_state_lock, channel_id).announcement_sigs_state = AnnouncementSigsState::PeerReceived; + } + { let mut node_1_per_peer_lock; let mut node_1_peer_state_lock; - get_channel_ref!(nodes[0], nodes[1], node_0_per_peer_lock, node_0_peer_state_lock, channel_id).announcement_sigs_state = AnnouncementSigsState::PeerReceived; get_channel_ref!(nodes[1], nodes[0], node_1_per_peer_lock, node_1_peer_state_lock, channel_id).announcement_sigs_state = AnnouncementSigsState::PeerReceived; } diff --git a/lightning/src/ln/functional_test_utils.rs b/lightning/src/ln/functional_test_utils.rs index b42491699..553cec5be 100644 --- a/lightning/src/ln/functional_test_utils.rs +++ b/lightning/src/ln/functional_test_utils.rs @@ -2151,9 +2151,10 @@ pub fn route_over_limit<'a, 'b, 'c>(origin_node: &Node<'a, 'b, 'c>, expected_rou assert!(err.contains("Cannot send value that would put us over the max HTLC value in flight our peer will accept"))); } -pub fn send_payment<'a, 'b, 'c>(origin: &Node<'a, 'b, 'c>, expected_route: &[&Node<'a, 'b, 'c>], recv_value: u64) { - let our_payment_preimage = route_payment(&origin, expected_route, recv_value).0; - claim_payment(&origin, expected_route, our_payment_preimage); +pub fn send_payment<'a, 'b, 'c>(origin: &Node<'a, 'b, 'c>, expected_route: &[&Node<'a, 'b, 'c>], recv_value: u64) -> (PaymentPreimage, PaymentHash, PaymentSecret) { + let res = route_payment(&origin, expected_route, recv_value); + claim_payment(&origin, expected_route, res.0); + res } pub fn fail_payment_along_route<'a, 'b, 'c>(origin_node: &Node<'a, 'b, 'c>, expected_paths: &[&[&Node<'a, 'b, 'c>]], skip_last: bool, our_payment_hash: PaymentHash) { diff --git a/lightning/src/ln/payment_tests.rs b/lightning/src/ln/payment_tests.rs index 4aa14dfa8..4dd1b9009 100644 --- a/lightning/src/ln/payment_tests.rs +++ b/lightning/src/ln/payment_tests.rs @@ -1194,33 +1194,31 @@ fn test_trivial_inflight_htlc_tracking(){ let (_, _, chan_2_id, _) = create_announced_chan_between_nodes(&nodes, 1, 2); // Send and claim the payment. Inflight HTLCs should be empty. - let (route, payment_hash, payment_preimage, payment_secret) = get_route_and_payment_hash!(nodes[0], nodes[2], 500000); - nodes[0].node.send_payment(&route, payment_hash, &Some(payment_secret), PaymentId(payment_hash.0)).unwrap(); - check_added_monitors!(nodes[0], 1); - pass_along_route(&nodes[0], &[&vec!(&nodes[1], &nodes[2])[..]], 500000, payment_hash, payment_secret); - claim_payment(&nodes[0], &vec!(&nodes[1], &nodes[2])[..], payment_preimage); + let payment_hash = send_payment(&nodes[0], &[&nodes[1], &nodes[2]], 500000).1; + let inflight_htlcs = node_chanmgrs[0].compute_inflight_htlcs(); { - let inflight_htlcs = node_chanmgrs[0].compute_inflight_htlcs(); - let mut node_0_per_peer_lock; let mut node_0_peer_state_lock; - let mut node_1_per_peer_lock; - let mut node_1_peer_state_lock; let channel_1 = get_channel_ref!(&nodes[0], nodes[1], node_0_per_peer_lock, node_0_peer_state_lock, chan_1_id); - let channel_2 = get_channel_ref!(&nodes[1], nodes[2], node_1_per_peer_lock, node_1_peer_state_lock, chan_2_id); let chan_1_used_liquidity = inflight_htlcs.used_liquidity_msat( &NodeId::from_pubkey(&nodes[0].node.get_our_node_id()) , &NodeId::from_pubkey(&nodes[1].node.get_our_node_id()), channel_1.get_short_channel_id().unwrap() ); + assert_eq!(chan_1_used_liquidity, None); + } + { + let mut node_1_per_peer_lock; + let mut node_1_peer_state_lock; + let channel_2 = get_channel_ref!(&nodes[1], nodes[2], node_1_per_peer_lock, node_1_peer_state_lock, chan_2_id); + let chan_2_used_liquidity = inflight_htlcs.used_liquidity_msat( &NodeId::from_pubkey(&nodes[1].node.get_our_node_id()) , &NodeId::from_pubkey(&nodes[2].node.get_our_node_id()), channel_2.get_short_channel_id().unwrap() ); - assert_eq!(chan_1_used_liquidity, None); assert_eq!(chan_2_used_liquidity, None); } let pending_payments = nodes[0].node.list_recent_payments(); @@ -1233,30 +1231,32 @@ fn test_trivial_inflight_htlc_tracking(){ } // Send the payment, but do not claim it. Our inflight HTLCs should contain the pending payment. - let (payment_preimage, payment_hash, _) = route_payment(&nodes[0], &vec!(&nodes[1], &nodes[2])[..], 500000); + let (payment_preimage, payment_hash, _) = route_payment(&nodes[0], &[&nodes[1], &nodes[2]], 500000); + let inflight_htlcs = node_chanmgrs[0].compute_inflight_htlcs(); { - let inflight_htlcs = node_chanmgrs[0].compute_inflight_htlcs(); - let mut node_0_per_peer_lock; let mut node_0_peer_state_lock; - let mut node_1_per_peer_lock; - let mut node_1_peer_state_lock; let channel_1 = get_channel_ref!(&nodes[0], nodes[1], node_0_per_peer_lock, node_0_peer_state_lock, chan_1_id); - let channel_2 = get_channel_ref!(&nodes[1], nodes[2], node_1_per_peer_lock, node_1_peer_state_lock, chan_2_id); let chan_1_used_liquidity = inflight_htlcs.used_liquidity_msat( &NodeId::from_pubkey(&nodes[0].node.get_our_node_id()) , &NodeId::from_pubkey(&nodes[1].node.get_our_node_id()), channel_1.get_short_channel_id().unwrap() ); + // First hop accounts for expected 1000 msat fee + assert_eq!(chan_1_used_liquidity, Some(501000)); + } + { + let mut node_1_per_peer_lock; + let mut node_1_peer_state_lock; + let channel_2 = get_channel_ref!(&nodes[1], nodes[2], node_1_per_peer_lock, node_1_peer_state_lock, chan_2_id); + let chan_2_used_liquidity = inflight_htlcs.used_liquidity_msat( &NodeId::from_pubkey(&nodes[1].node.get_our_node_id()) , &NodeId::from_pubkey(&nodes[2].node.get_our_node_id()), channel_2.get_short_channel_id().unwrap() ); - // First hop accounts for expected 1000 msat fee - assert_eq!(chan_1_used_liquidity, Some(501000)); assert_eq!(chan_2_used_liquidity, Some(500000)); } let pending_payments = nodes[0].node.list_recent_payments(); @@ -1271,28 +1271,29 @@ fn test_trivial_inflight_htlc_tracking(){ nodes[0].node.timer_tick_occurred(); } + let inflight_htlcs = node_chanmgrs[0].compute_inflight_htlcs(); { - let inflight_htlcs = node_chanmgrs[0].compute_inflight_htlcs(); - let mut node_0_per_peer_lock; let mut node_0_peer_state_lock; - let mut node_1_per_peer_lock; - let mut node_1_peer_state_lock; let channel_1 = get_channel_ref!(&nodes[0], nodes[1], node_0_per_peer_lock, node_0_peer_state_lock, chan_1_id); - let channel_2 = get_channel_ref!(&nodes[1], nodes[2], node_1_per_peer_lock, node_1_peer_state_lock, chan_2_id); let chan_1_used_liquidity = inflight_htlcs.used_liquidity_msat( &NodeId::from_pubkey(&nodes[0].node.get_our_node_id()) , &NodeId::from_pubkey(&nodes[1].node.get_our_node_id()), channel_1.get_short_channel_id().unwrap() ); + assert_eq!(chan_1_used_liquidity, None); + } + { + let mut node_1_per_peer_lock; + let mut node_1_peer_state_lock; + let channel_2 = get_channel_ref!(&nodes[1], nodes[2], node_1_per_peer_lock, node_1_peer_state_lock, chan_2_id); + let chan_2_used_liquidity = inflight_htlcs.used_liquidity_msat( &NodeId::from_pubkey(&nodes[1].node.get_our_node_id()) , &NodeId::from_pubkey(&nodes[2].node.get_our_node_id()), channel_2.get_short_channel_id().unwrap() ); - - assert_eq!(chan_1_used_liquidity, None); assert_eq!(chan_2_used_liquidity, None); } diff --git a/lightning/src/routing/utxo.rs b/lightning/src/routing/utxo.rs index 0e5bd8d64..09e110c2d 100644 --- a/lightning/src/routing/utxo.rs +++ b/lightning/src/routing/utxo.rs @@ -745,10 +745,11 @@ mod tests { Ok(TxOut { value: 1_000_000, script_pubkey: good_script })); assert_eq!(chan_update_a.contents.timestamp, chan_update_b.contents.timestamp); - assert!(network_graph.read_only().channels() + let graph_lock = network_graph.read_only(); + assert!(graph_lock.channels() .get(&valid_announcement.contents.short_channel_id).as_ref().unwrap() .one_to_two.as_ref().unwrap().last_update != - network_graph.read_only().channels() + graph_lock.channels() .get(&valid_announcement.contents.short_channel_id).as_ref().unwrap() .two_to_one.as_ref().unwrap().last_update); } diff --git a/lightning/src/sync/debug_sync.rs b/lightning/src/sync/debug_sync.rs index 563109372..aa9f5fe9c 100644 --- a/lightning/src/sync/debug_sync.rs +++ b/lightning/src/sync/debug_sync.rs @@ -124,21 +124,13 @@ impl LockMetadata { res } - // Returns whether we were a recursive lock (only relevant for read) - fn _pre_lock(this: &Arc, read: bool) -> bool { - let mut inserted = false; + fn pre_lock(this: &Arc) { LOCKS_HELD.with(|held| { // For each lock which is currently locked, check that no lock's locked-before // set includes the lock we're about to lock, which would imply a lockorder // inversion. - for (locked_idx, _locked) in held.borrow().iter() { - if read && *locked_idx == this.lock_idx { - // Recursive read locks are explicitly allowed - return; - } - } for (locked_idx, locked) in held.borrow().iter() { - if !read && *locked_idx == this.lock_idx { + if *locked_idx == this.lock_idx { // With `feature = "backtrace"` set, we may be looking at different instances // of the same lock. debug_assert!(cfg!(feature = "backtrace"), "Tried to acquire a lock while it was held!"); @@ -162,14 +154,9 @@ impl LockMetadata { } } held.borrow_mut().insert(this.lock_idx, Arc::clone(this)); - inserted = true; }); - inserted } - fn pre_lock(this: &Arc) { Self::_pre_lock(this, false); } - fn pre_read_lock(this: &Arc) -> bool { Self::_pre_lock(this, true) } - fn held_by_thread(this: &Arc) -> LockHeldState { let mut res = LockHeldState::NotHeldByThread; LOCKS_HELD.with(|held| { @@ -276,7 +263,6 @@ pub struct RwLock { pub struct RwLockReadGuard<'a, T: Sized + 'a> { lock: &'a RwLock, - first_lock: bool, guard: StdRwLockReadGuard<'a, T>, } @@ -295,12 +281,6 @@ impl Deref for RwLockReadGuard<'_, T> { impl Drop for RwLockReadGuard<'_, T> { fn drop(&mut self) { - if !self.first_lock { - // Note that its not strictly true that the first taken read lock will get unlocked - // last, but in practice our locks are always taken as RAII, so it should basically - // always be true. - return; - } LOCKS_HELD.with(|held| { held.borrow_mut().remove(&self.lock.deps.lock_idx); }); @@ -335,8 +315,11 @@ impl RwLock { } pub fn read<'a>(&'a self) -> LockResult> { - let first_lock = LockMetadata::pre_read_lock(&self.deps); - self.inner.read().map(|guard| RwLockReadGuard { lock: self, guard, first_lock }).map_err(|_| ()) + // Note that while we could be taking a recursive read lock here, Rust's `RwLock` may + // deadlock trying to take a second read lock if another thread is waiting on the write + // lock. Its platform dependent (but our in-tree `FairRwLock` guarantees this behavior). + LockMetadata::pre_lock(&self.deps); + self.inner.read().map(|guard| RwLockReadGuard { lock: self, guard }).map_err(|_| ()) } pub fn write<'a>(&'a self) -> LockResult> { diff --git a/lightning/src/sync/test_lockorder_checks.rs b/lightning/src/sync/test_lockorder_checks.rs index a3f746b11..6d72410bd 100644 --- a/lightning/src/sync/test_lockorder_checks.rs +++ b/lightning/src/sync/test_lockorder_checks.rs @@ -15,6 +15,8 @@ fn recursive_lock_fail() { } #[test] +#[should_panic] +#[cfg(not(feature = "backtrace"))] fn recursive_read() { let lock = RwLock::new(()); let _a = lock.read().unwrap(); @@ -66,23 +68,6 @@ fn read_lockorder_fail() { } } -#[test] -fn read_recursive_no_lockorder() { - // Like the above, but note that no lockorder is implied when we recursively read-lock a - // RwLock, causing this to pass just fine. - let a = RwLock::new(()); - let b = RwLock::new(()); - let _outer = a.read().unwrap(); - { - let _a = a.read().unwrap(); - let _b = b.read().unwrap(); - } - { - let _b = b.read().unwrap(); - let _a = a.read().unwrap(); - } -} - #[test] #[should_panic] fn read_write_lockorder_fail() {