Re: PG signal handler and non-reentrant malloc/free calls

From: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
To: Nikhil Sontakke <nikhil(dot)sontakke(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: PG signal handler and non-reentrant malloc/free calls
Date: 2011-02-28 12:27:08
Message-ID: 4D6B949C.5050903@enterprisedb.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 28.02.2011 14:04, Nikhil Sontakke wrote:
> I believe we have a case where not holding off interrupts while doing a
> malloc() can cause a deadlock due to system or libc level locking. In this
> case, a pg_ctl stop in fast mode was resorted to and that caused a backend
> to handle the interrupt when it was inside the malloc call. Now as part of
> the abort processing, in the subtransaction cleanup code path, this same
> backend tried to clear memory contexts, leading to an eventual free() call.
> The free() call tried to take the same lock which was already held by
> malloc() earlier resulting into a deadlock!

Our signal handlers shouldn't try to do anything that complicated.
die(), which handles SIGTERM caused by fast shutdown in backends,
doesn't do abort processing itself. It just sets a global variable.

Unless ImmediateInterruptOK is set, but it's only set around a few
blocking system calls where it is safe to do so. (Checks...) Actually,
md5_crypt_verify() looks suspicious, it does "ImmediateInterruptOK =
true", and then calls palloc() and pfree().

> Will try to get the call stack if needed.

Yes, please.

--
Heikki Linnakangas
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Fujii Masao 2011-02-28 13:08:12 Re: Replication server timeout patch
Previous Message Nikhil Sontakke 2011-02-28 12:04:03 PG signal handler and non-reentrant malloc/free calls