From 600b4be4d9439aa0f107cd63760d9fc121432717 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Mike Crowe Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2019 12:39:02 +0000 Subject: nptl: pthread_rwlock: Move timeout validation into _full functions As recommended by the comments in the implementations of pthread_rwlock_timedrdlock and pthread_rwlock_timedwrlock, let's move the timeout validity checks into the corresponding pthread_rwlock_rdlock_full and pthread_rwlock_wrlock_full functions. Since these functions may be called with abstime == NULL, an extra check for that is necessary too. * nptl/pthread_rwlock_common.c (__pthread_rwlock_rdlock_full): Check validity of abstime parameter. (__pthread_rwlock_rwlock_full): Likewise. * nptl/pthread_rwlock_timedrdlock.c * (pthread_rwlock_timedrdlock): Remove check for validity of abstime parameter. * nptl/pthread_rwlock_timedwrlock.c * (pthread_rwlock_timedwrlock): Likewise. Reviewed-by: Adhemerval Zanella --- ChangeLog | 9 +++++++++ nptl/pthread_rwlock_common.c | 20 ++++++++++++++++++++ nptl/pthread_rwlock_timedrdlock.c | 10 ---------- nptl/pthread_rwlock_timedwrlock.c | 10 ---------- 4 files changed, 29 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-) diff --git a/ChangeLog b/ChangeLog index 718f8f4d38..e57fc446be 100644 --- a/ChangeLog +++ b/ChangeLog @@ -1,5 +1,14 @@ 2019-07-12 Mike Crowe + nptl: pthread_rwlock: Move timeout validation into _full functions + * nptl/pthread_rwlock_common.c (__pthread_rwlock_rdlock_full): + Check validity of abstime parameter. + (__pthread_rwlock_rwlock_full): Likewise. + * nptl/pthread_rwlock_timedrdlock.c (pthread_rwlock_timedrdlock): + Remove check for validity of abstime parameter. + * nptl/pthread_rwlock_timedwrlock.c (pthread_rwlock_timedwrlock): + Likewise. + nptl: Add POSIX-proposed pthread_cond_clockwait which behaves just like pthread_cond_timedwait except it always measures abstime against the supplied clockid. diff --git a/nptl/pthread_rwlock_common.c b/nptl/pthread_rwlock_common.c index 89ba21ac7c..120b880acf 100644 --- a/nptl/pthread_rwlock_common.c +++ b/nptl/pthread_rwlock_common.c @@ -282,6 +282,16 @@ __pthread_rwlock_rdlock_full (pthread_rwlock_t *rwlock, { unsigned int r; + /* Make sure any passed in timeout value is valid. Note that the previous + implementation assumed that this check *must* not be performed if there + would in fact be no blocking; however, POSIX only requires that "the + validity of the abstime parameter need not be checked if the lock can be + immediately acquired" (i.e., we need not but may check it). */ + if (abstime + && __glibc_unlikely (abstime->tv_nsec >= 1000000000 + || abstime->tv_nsec < 0)) + return EINVAL; + /* Make sure we are not holding the rwlock as a writer. This is a deadlock situation we recognize and report. */ if (__glibc_unlikely (atomic_load_relaxed (&rwlock->__data.__cur_writer) @@ -576,6 +586,16 @@ static __always_inline int __pthread_rwlock_wrlock_full (pthread_rwlock_t *rwlock, const struct timespec *abstime) { + /* Make sure any passed in timeout value is valid. Note that the previous + implementation assumed that this check *must* not be performed if there + would in fact be no blocking; however, POSIX only requires that "the + validity of the abstime parameter need not be checked if the lock can be + immediately acquired" (i.e., we need not but may check it). */ + if (abstime + && __glibc_unlikely (abstime->tv_nsec >= 1000000000 + || abstime->tv_nsec < 0)) + return EINVAL; + /* Make sure we are not holding the rwlock as a writer. This is a deadlock situation we recognize and report. */ if (__glibc_unlikely (atomic_load_relaxed (&rwlock->__data.__cur_writer) diff --git a/nptl/pthread_rwlock_timedrdlock.c b/nptl/pthread_rwlock_timedrdlock.c index aa0053094d..84c1983491 100644 --- a/nptl/pthread_rwlock_timedrdlock.c +++ b/nptl/pthread_rwlock_timedrdlock.c @@ -23,15 +23,5 @@ int pthread_rwlock_timedrdlock (pthread_rwlock_t *rwlock, const struct timespec *abstime) { - /* Make sure the passed in timeout value is valid. Note that the previous - implementation assumed that this check *must* not be performed if there - would in fact be no blocking; however, POSIX only requires that "the - validity of the abstime parameter need not be checked if the lock can be - immediately acquired" (i.e., we need not but may check it). */ - /* ??? Just move this to __pthread_rwlock_rdlock_full? */ - if (__glibc_unlikely (abstime->tv_nsec >= 1000000000 - || abstime->tv_nsec < 0)) - return EINVAL; - return __pthread_rwlock_rdlock_full (rwlock, abstime); } diff --git a/nptl/pthread_rwlock_timedwrlock.c b/nptl/pthread_rwlock_timedwrlock.c index 3c92e44830..f0b745df02 100644 --- a/nptl/pthread_rwlock_timedwrlock.c +++ b/nptl/pthread_rwlock_timedwrlock.c @@ -23,15 +23,5 @@ int pthread_rwlock_timedwrlock (pthread_rwlock_t *rwlock, const struct timespec *abstime) { - /* Make sure the passed in timeout value is valid. Note that the previous - implementation assumed that this check *must* not be performed if there - would in fact be no blocking; however, POSIX only requires that "the - validity of the abstime parameter need not be checked if the lock can be - immediately acquired" (i.e., we need not but may check it). */ - /* ??? Just move this to __pthread_rwlock_wrlock_full? */ - if (__glibc_unlikely (abstime->tv_nsec >= 1000000000 - || abstime->tv_nsec < 0)) - return EINVAL; - return __pthread_rwlock_wrlock_full (rwlock, abstime); } -- cgit 1.4.1