Re: Postmaster self-deadlock due to PLT linkage resolution

From: Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Postmaster self-deadlock due to PLT linkage resolution
Date: 2022-09-05 02:28:48
Message-ID: CA+hUKG+YwXPhyWUDfT496wbbRMFiRyDDveb7PbFoba0xTJcdbw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Wed, Aug 31, 2022 at 1:34 AM Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 31, 2022 at 12:26 AM Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > On Tue, Aug 30, 2022 at 8:17 AM Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> > > FWIW I suspect FreeBSD can't break like this in a program linked with
> > > libthr, because it has a scheme for deferring signals while the
> > > runtime linker holds locks. _rtld_bind calls _thr_rtld_rlock_acquire,
> > > which uses the THR_CRITICAL_ENTER mechanism to cause thr_sighandler to
> > > defer until release. For a non-thread program, I'm not entirely sure,
> > > but I don't think the fork() problem exists there. (Could be wrong,
> > > based on a quick look.)
> >
> > Well that seems a bit ironic, considering that Tom has worried in the
> > past that linking with threading libraries would break stuff.
>
> Hah. To clarify, non-thread builds don't have that exact fork()
> problem, but it turns out they do have a related state clobbering
> problem elsewhere, which I've reported.

For the record, reporting that resulted in a change for non-libthr rtld:

https://cgit.freebsd.org/src/commit/?id=a687683b997c5805ecd6d8278798b7ef00d9908f

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message shiy.fnst@fujitsu.com 2022-09-05 03:42:40 RE: Column Filtering in Logical Replication
Previous Message Thomas Munro 2022-09-05 01:28:12 Re: pg15b3: recovery fails with wal prefetch enabled