Re: TLS bug?

Atcht; it's late.  I forgot to mention that this system is a sparc64 V240
2-way SMP machine.  It's running a kernel from 9.0-CURRENT r222833+262af52:
Tue Jun  7 18:47:35 EDT 2011 and a userland from a little later.

Sorry about that.
--nwf;

On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 03:31:38AM -0400, Nathaniel W Filardo wrote:
> I have a few applications (bonnie++ and mysql, specifically, both from
> ports) which trip over the assertion in
> lib/libc/stdlib/malloc.c:/^_malloc_thread_cleanup that
> >   assert(tcache != (void *)(uintptr_t)1);
> 
> I have patched malloc.c thus:
> 
> > --- a/lib/libc/stdlib/malloc.c
> > +++ b/lib/libc/stdlib/malloc.c
> > _at__at_ -1108,7 +1108,7 _at__at_ static __thread arena_t           *arenas_map TLS_MODEL;
> >  
> >  #ifdef MALLOC_TCACHE
> >  /* Map of thread-specific caches. */
> > -static __thread tcache_t       *tcache_tls TLS_MODEL;
> > +__thread tcache_t      *tcache_tls TLS_MODEL;
> >  
> >  /*
> >   * Number of cache slots for each bin in the thread cache, or 0 if tcache
> >   * is
> > _at__at_ -6184,10 +6184,17 _at__at_ _malloc_thread_cleanup(void)
> >  #ifdef MALLOC_TCACHE
> >         tcache_t *tcache = tcache_tls;
> >  
> > +        fprintf(stderr, "_m_t_c for %d:%lu with %p\n", 
> > +               getpid(),
> > +               (unsigned long) _pthread_self(),
> > +               tcache);
> > +
> >         if (tcache != NULL) {
> > -               assert(tcache != (void *)(uintptr_t)1);
> > -               tcache_destroy(tcache);
> > -               tcache_tls = (void *)(uintptr_t)1;
> > +               /* assert(tcache != (void *)(uintptr_t)1); */
> > +               if((uintptr_t)tcache != (uintptr_t)1) {
> > +                       tcache_destroy(tcache);
> > +                       tcache_tls = (void *)(uintptr_t)1;
> > +               }
> 
> and libthr/thread/thr_create.c thus:
> 
> > --- a/lib/libthr/thread/thr_create.c
> > +++ b/lib/libthr/thread/thr_create.c
> > _at__at_ -243,6 +243,8 _at__at_ create_stack(struct pthread_attr *pattr)
> >         return (ret);
> >  }
> >  
> > +extern __thread void *tcache_tls;
> > +
> >  static void
> >  thread_start(struct pthread *curthread)
> >  {
> > _at__at_ -280,6 +282,11 _at__at_ thread_start(struct pthread *curthread)
> >                 curthread->attr.stacksize_attr;
> >  #endif
> >  
> > +        fprintf(stderr, "t_s for %d:%lu with %p\n",
> > +                getpid(),
> > +                (unsigned long) _pthread_self(),
> > +                tcache_tls);
> > +
> >         /* Run the current thread's start routine with argument: */
> >         _pthread_exit(curthread->start_routine(curthread->arg));
> >  
> 
> to attempt to debug this issue.  With those changes in place, bonnie++'s
> execution looks like this:
> 
> >[...]
> > Writing a byte at a time...done
> > Writing intelligently...done
> > Rewriting...done
> > Reading a byte at a time...done
> > Reading intelligently...done
> > t_s for 79654:1086343168 with 0x0
> > t_s for 79654:1086345216 with 0x0
> > t_s for 79654:1086346240 with 0x0
> > t_s for 79654:1086347264 with 0x0
> > t_s for 79654:1086344192 with 0x0
> > start 'em...done...done...done...done..._m_t_c for 79654:1086344192 with
> > 0x41404400
> > _m_t_c for 79654:1086346240 with 0x40d2c400
> > _m_t_c for 79654:1086343168 with 0x41404200
> > _m_t_c for 79654:1086345216 with 0x41804200
> > done...
> > _m_t_c for 79654:1086347264 with 0x41004200
> > Create files in sequential order...done.
> > Stat files in sequential order...done.
> > Delete files in sequential order...done.
> > Create files in random order...done.
> > Stat files in random order...done.
> > Delete files in random order...done.
> > 1.96,1.96,hydra.priv.oc.ietfng.org,1,1308217772,10M,,7,81,2644,7,3577,14,34,93,+++++,+++,773.7,61,16,,,
> > ,,2325,74,13016,99,2342,86,3019,91,11888,99,2184,89,16397ms,1237ms,671ms,2009ms,177us,1305ms,489ms,1029
> > us,270ms,140ms,53730us,250ms
> > Writing a byte at a time...done
> > Writing intelligently...done
> > Rewriting...done
> > Reading a byte at a time...done
> > Reading intelligently...done
> > t_s for 79654:1086343168 with 0x1
> > t_s for 79654:1086346240 with 0x1
> > t_s for 79654:1086345216 with 0x1
> > t_s for 79654:1086347264 with 0x1
> > t_s for 79654:1086344192 with 0x1
> > start 'em...done...done...done...done...done...
> > _m_t_c for 79654:1086347264 with 0x1
> > _m_t_c for 79654:1086344192 with 0x1
> > _m_t_c for 79654:1086343168 with 0x1
> >[...]
> 
> So what seems to be happening is that the TLS area is being set up
> incorrectly, eventually: rather than zeroing the tcache_tls value, it is
> being set to 1, which means no tcache is ever allocated, so when we get
> around to exiting, the assert trips.
> 
> Unfortunately, setting a breakpoint on __libc_allocate_tls seems to do bad
> things to the kernel (inducing a SIR without any panic message).  I am
> somewhat at a loss; help?
> 
> Thanks in advance!
> --nwf;