[PATCH 1/2] packfile: fix race condition on unpack_entry()
- From
Matheus Tavares <matheus.bernardino@usp.br>
- Date
- Sep 28, 2020, 16:50 UTC
- Message-ID
- <42a7948f94cb57ebd9c37c3850b46b1ac9813ec6.1601311803.git.matheus.bernardino@usp.br>
- In-Reply-To
- <cover.1601311803.git.matheus.bernardino@usp.br>
The third phase of unpack_entry() performs the following sequence in a loop, until all the deltas enumerated in phase one are applied and the entry is fully reconstructed:
1. Add the current base entry to the delta base cache 2. Unpack the next delta 3. Patch the unpacked delta on top of the base
When the optional object reading lock is enabled, the above steps will be performed while holding the lock. However, step 2. momentarily releases it so that inflation can be performed in parallel for increased performance. Because the `base` buffer inserted in the cache at 1. is not duplicated, another thread can potentially free() it while the lock is released at 2. (e.g. when there is no space left in the cache to insert another entry). In this case, the later attempt to dereference `base` at 3. will cause a segmentation fault. This problem was observed during a multithreaded git-grep execution on a repository with large objects.
To fix the race condition (and later segmentation fault), let's reorder the aforementioned steps so that the lock is not released between 1. and 3. An alternative solution which would not require the reordering would be to duplicate `base` before inserting it in the cache. However, as Phil Hord mentioned, memcpy()'ing large bases can negatively affect performance: in his experiments, this alternative approach slowed git-grep down by 10% to 20%.
Reported-by: Phil Hord <phil.hord@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Matheus Tavares <matheus.bernardino@usp.br> --- packfile.c | 41 ++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------- 1 file changed, 24 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
diff --git a/packfile.c b/packfile.c index 9ef27508f2..0319418d88 100644 --- a/packfile.c +++ b/packfile.c @@ -1775,12 +1775,10 @@ void *unpack_entry(struct repository *r, struct packed_git *p, off_t obj_offset, void *external_base = NULL; unsigned long delta_size, base_size = size; int i; + off_t base_obj_offset = obj_offset; data = NULL; - if (base) - add_delta_base_cache(p, obj_offset, base, base_size, type); - if (!base) { /* * We're probably in deep shit, but let's try to fetch @@ -1818,24 +1816,33 @@ void *unpack_entry(struct repository *r, struct packed_git *p, off_t obj_offset, "at offset %"PRIuMAX" from %s", (uintmax_t)curpos, p->pack_name); data = NULL; - free(external_base); - continue; - } + } else { + data = patch_delta(base, base_size, delta_data, + delta_size, &size); - data = patch_delta(base, base_size, - delta_data, delta_size, - &size); + /* + * We could not apply the delta; warn the user, but + * keep going. Our failure will be noticed either in + * the next iteration of the loop, or if this is the + * final delta, in the caller when we return NULL. + * Those code paths will take care of making a more + * explicit warning and retrying with another copy of + * the object. + */ + if (!data) + error("failed to apply delta"); + } /* - * We could not apply the delta; warn the user, but keep going. - * Our failure will be noticed either in the next iteration of - * the loop, or if this is the final delta, in the caller when - * we return NULL. Those code paths will take care of making - * a more explicit warning and retrying with another copy of - * the object. + * We delay adding `base` to the cache until the end of the loop + * because unpack_compressed_entry() momentarily releases the + * obj_read_mutex, giving another thread the chance to access + * the cache. Therefore, if `base` was already there, this other + * thread could free() it (e.g. to make space for another entry) + * before we are done using it. */ - if (!data) - error("failed to apply delta"); + if (!external_base) + add_delta_base_cache(p, base_obj_offset, base, base_size, type); free(delta_data); free(external_base);
-- 2.28.0