Re: PSA: If you run -current, beware!

On Thursday, February 5, 2015, Peter Wemm <peter_at_wemm.org> wrote:

> On Wednesday, February 04, 2015 04:29:41 PM Konstantin Belousov wrote:
> > On Tue, Feb 03, 2015 at 01:33:15PM -0800, Peter Wemm wrote:
> > > Sometime in the Dec 10th through Jan 7th timeframe a timing bug has
> been
> > > introduced to 11.x/head/-current.    With HZ=1000 (the default for bare
> > > metal, not for a vm); the clocks stop just after 24 days of uptime.
> This
> > > means things like cron, sleep, timeouts etc stop working.  TCP/IP won't
> > > time out or retransmit, etc etc.  It can get ugly.
> > >
> > > The problem is NOT in 10.x/-stable.
> > >
> > > We hit this in the freebsd.org cluster, the builds that we used are:
> > > FreeBSD 11.0-CURRENT #0 r275684: Wed Dec 10 20:38:43 UTC 2014 - fine
> > > FreeBSD 11.0-CURRENT #0 r276779: Wed Jan  7 18:47:09 UTC 2015 - broken
> > >
> > > If you are running -current in a situation where it'll accumulate
> uptime,
> > > you may want to take precautions.  A reboot prior to 24 days uptime (as
> > > horrible a workaround as that is) will avoid it.
> > >
> > > Yes, this is being worked on.
> >
> > So the issue is reproducable in 3 minutes after boot with the following
> > change in kern_clock.c:
> > volatile int  ticks = INT_MAX - (/*hz*/1000 * 3 * 60);
> >
> > It is fixed (in the proper meaning of the word, not like worked around,
> > covered by paper) by the patch at the end of the mail.
> >
> > We already have a story trying to enable much less ambitious option
> > -fno-strict-overflow, see r259045 and the revert in r259422.  I do not
> > see other way than try one more time.  Too many places in kernel
> > depend on the correctly wrapping 2-complement arithmetic, among others
> > are callweel and scheduler.
>
>
Rather than depending on a compiler option, wouldn't it be better/more
robust to change ticks to unsigned, which has specified wrapping behavior?

Cheers
Luigi

Ugh.
>
> I believe I have a smoking gun that suggests that the clock-stop problem is
> caused by the clang-3.5 import on Dec 31st.
>
> Backstory:
> http://blog.llvm.org/2011/05/what-every-c-programmer-should-know.html
> http://www.airs.com/blog/archives/120
>
> I suspect that what has happened is that clang's optimizer got better at
> seeing the direct or indirect effects of integer overflow and clang (and
> gcc)
> take advantage of that.
>
> I have used a slightly different change for about 10 years:
>
> --- kern/kern_clock.c   2014-12-01 15:42:21.707911656 -0800
> +++ kern/kern_clock.c   2014-12-01 15:42:21.707911656 -0800
> _at__at_ -410,6 +415,11 _at__at_
>  #ifdef SW_WATCHDOG
>         EVENTHANDLER_REGISTER(watchdog_list, watchdog_config, NULL, 0);
>  #endif
> +       /*
> +        * Arrange for ticks to go negative just 5 minutes after boot
> +        * to help catch sign problems sooner.
> +        */
> +       ticks = INT_MAX - (hz * 5 * 60);
>  }
>
>  /*
>
> This came about from when we had problems with integer overflow arithmetic
> in
> the tcp stack.
>
> In any case, I'm in the process of adding -fwrapv and the early wraparound
> to
> the freebsd.org cluster builds to give it some wider exercise.
>
> --
> Peter Wemm - peter_at_wemm.org <javascript:;>; peter_at_FreeBSD.org;
> peter_at_yahoo-inc.com <javascript:;>; KI6FJV
> UTF-8: for when a ' or ... just won\342\200\231t do\342\200\246



-- 
-----------------------------------------+-------------------------------
 Prof. Luigi RIZZO, rizzo_at_iet.unipi.it  . Dip. di Ing. dell'Informazione
 http://www.iet.unipi.it/~luigi/        . Universita` di Pisa
 TEL      +39-050-2211611               . via Diotisalvi 2
 Mobile   +39-338-6809875               . 56122 PISA (Italy)
-----------------------------------------+-------------------------------