[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [libvirt] Potential race condition problem



Hi,

OK. Now I am using JNA to access libvirt. If we add another mutex which used to access “initialized” parameter. This mutex must be pthread_mutex_init firstly and only once.

But it seems that there is no way to change libvirt code. I do it as following:

1.      Changing libvirt JNA code in Connect.java

Old Code:

    public Connect(String uri) throws LibvirtException {

         VCP = libvirt.virConnectOpen(uri);

        // Check for an error

        processError();

        ErrorHandler.processError(Libvirt.INSTANCE);

    }

 

New Code:

    public Connect(String uri) throws LibvirtException {

         synchronized(this.getClass()) {

                  VCP = libvirt.virConnectOpen(uri);

         }

        // Check for an error

        processError();

        ErrorHandler.processError(Libvirt.INSTANCE);

    }

 

This can make sure only that one thread can execute Connect. For a server application, we only need one time. So the performance is OK

 

2.      Changing libvirt code in libvirt.c

Old Code:

static int initialized = 0;

 

New Code:

static int volatile initialized = 0;

 

This can make sure the initialization will be executed once.

 

Would you give your comments for this solution?

 

B.R.

Benjamin Wang

 

From: Guannan Ren [mailto:gren redhat com]
Sent: 2012
929 15:43
To: Benjamin Wang (gendwang)
Cc: Daniel Veillard; libvir-list redhat com; Yang Zhou (yangzho)
Subject: Re: [libvirt] Potential race condition problem

 

On 09/29/2012 03:07 PM, Benjamin Wang (gendwang) wrote:

Hi,

   Currently virInitialize() method defined in libvirt.c has the following code:

int

virInitialize(void)

{

    if (initialized)

        return 0;

 

    initialized = 1;

 

    if (virThreadInitialize() < 0 ||

        virErrorInitialize() < 0 ||

        virRandomInitialize(time(NULL) ^ getpid()) ||

        virNodeSuspendInit() < 0)

        return -1;

 

……

}

 

When two threads access virInitialize method, there is no lock for the “initialized” parameter. If the first thread enters this method and set “initialized” to 1,

the second thread could see that “initialized” is 1(Because initialized is not volatiled, I say could). In some situation, before the first thread finishes all the initialization,

the second thread could use some resources which should be initialized in Initialize method.

If you have any comments, please let me know. Thanks!

 

B.R.

Benjamin Wang

 


      As the comments above the function said,
      "It's better to call this routine at startup in multithreaded applications to avoid potential race when initializing the library."
     

      Guannan


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]