Page History

...

Can be used in places where locks must be avoided, such as interrupt handlers
Efficiency benefits compared to lock-based algorithms for some workloads, including potential scalability benefits on multiprocessor machines
Avoidance of priority inversion in real-time systems

A limitation of lockLock-free programming is that it requires the use of special atomic processor instructions, such as CAS (compare and swap), LL/SC (load linked/store conditional), or the C11 C Standard atomic_compare_exchange generic functions.

Applications for lock-free programming include

...

The ABA problem occurs during synchronization: a memory location is read twice and has the same value for both reads. However, another thread has modified the value, did performed other work, then modified the value back between the two reads, thereby fooling tricking the first thread into thinking that the value never changed.

Noncompliant Code Example

This noncompliant code example tries attempts to zero the maximum element of an array. We assume this example may The example is assumed to run in a multithreaded environment, and where all variables are accessible to other are accessed by other threads.

Code Block

bgColor	#ffcccc
lang	c

#include <stdatomic.h>
 
/*
 * Sets index to point to index of maximum element in array
 * and value to contain maximum array value.
 */
void find_max_element(atomic_int array[], size_t *index, int *value);

void func(void) {
  static atomic_int array[];

void func(void) {
  size_t index;
  int value;
  find_max_element(array, &index, &value);
  /* ... */
  if (!atomic_compare_exchange_strong(array[index], &value, 0)) {
    /* Handle error */
  }
}

The compare-and-swap operation sets array[index] to 0 if and only if it is currently set to value. However, this behavior code does not necessarily zero out the maximum value of the array because

index may have changed.
value may have changed (that is, the value of the value variable).
value may no longer be the maximum value in the array.

Compliant Solution (Mutex)

This compliant solution uses a mutex to prevent the data from being modified during the operation. Although this code is thread-safe, it is no longer lock-free.

Code Block

bgColor	#ccccff
lang	c

#include <stdatomic.h>
#include <threads.h>
 
static atomic_int array[];
static mtx_t array_mutex;

void func(void) {
  atomic_int array[];
  size_t index;
  int value;
  mtx_t array_mutex;
  if (thrd_success != mtx_lock(&array_mutex)) {
    /* Handle error */
  }
  find_max_element(array, &index, &value);
  /* ... */
  if (!atomic_compare_exchange_strong(array[index], &value, 0)) {
    /* Handle error */
  }
  if (thrd_success != mtx_unlock(&array_mutex)) {
    /* Handle error */
  }
}

Noncompliant Code Example (GNU Glib)

This code implements a queue data structure using lock-free programming. It is implemented using glib. The function CAS() internally uses g_atomic_pointer_compare_and_exchange().

Code Block

bgColor	#FFcccc
lang	c

#include <glib.h>
#include <glib-object.h>

typedef struct node_s {
  void *data;
  Node *next;
} Node;

typedef struct queue_s {
  Node *head;
  Node *tail;
} Queue;

Queue* queue_new(void) {
  Queue *q = g_slice_new(sizeof(Queue));
  q->head = q->tail = g_slice_new(sizeof(Node));
  return q;
}

void queue_enqueue(Queue *q, gpointer data) {
  Node *node;
  Node *tail;
  Node *next;

  node = g_slice_new(Node);
  node->data = data;
  node->next = NULL;
  while (TRUE) {
    tail = q->tail;
    next = tail->next;
    if (tail != q->tail) {
      continue;
    }
    if (next != NULL) {
      CAS(&q->tail, tail, next);
      continue;
    }
    if (CAS(&tail->next, nullNULL, node)) {
      break;
    }
  }
  CAS(&q->tail, tail, node);
}

gpointer queue_dequeue(Queue *q) {
  Node *node;
  Node *head;
  Node *tail;
  Node *next;
  gpointer data;

  while (TRUE) {
    head = q->head;
    tail = q->tail;
    next = head->next;
    if (head != q->head) {
      continue;
    }
    if (next == NULL) {
      return NULL; /* Empty */
    }
    if (head == tail) {
      CAS(&q->tail, tail, next);
      continue;
    }
    data = next->data;
    if (CAS(&q->head, head, next)) {
      break;
    }
  }
  g_slice_free(Node, head);
  return data;
}

...

The following sequence of operations occurs:

Thread	Queue Before	Operation	Queue After
`T1`	`head -> A -> B -> C -> tail`	Enters `queue_dequeue()` function `head = A, tail = C` `next = B` after executing `data = next->data;` This thread gets preempted	`head -> A -> B -> C -> tail`
`T2`	`head -> A -> B -> C -> tail`	Removes node A	`head -> B -> C -> tail`
`T2`	`head -> B -> C -> tail`	Removes node B	`head -> C -> tail`
`T2`	`head -> C -> tail`	Enqueues node A back into the queue	`head -> C -> A -> tail`
`T2`	`head -> C -> A -> tail`	Removes node C	`head -> A -> tail`
`T2`	`head -> A -> tail`	Enqueues a new node D After enqueue operation, thread 2 gets preempted	`head -> A -> D -> tail`
`T1`	`head -> A -> D -> tail`	Thread 1 starts execution Compares the local head = `q->head` = A (true in this case) Updates `q->head` with node B (but node B is removed)	undefined {}

According to the sequence of events in this table, head will now point to memory that was freed. Also, if reclaimed memory is returned to the operating system (for example, using munmap()), access to such memory locations can result in fatal access violation errors. The ABA problem occurred because of the internal reuse of nodes that have been popped off the list or the reclamation of memory occupied by removed nodes.

Compliant Solution (GNU Glib, Hazard Pointers)

The According to [Michael 2004], the core idea is to associate a number (typically one or two) of single-writer, multireader multi-reader shared pointers, called hazard pointers. A pointers, with each thread that intends to access lock-free dynamic objects. A hazard pointer either has a null value or points to a node that may be accessed later by that thread without further validation that the reference to the node is still valid. Each hazard pointer may be written only by its owner thread but may be read by other threads.

In this solution, communication with the associated algorithms is accomplished only through hazard pointers and a procedure RetireNode() that is called by threads to pass the addresses of retired nodes.

PSEUDOCODE

Code Block

bgColor	#ccccff
lang	c

/* Hazard pointers types and structure */
structure HPRecType {
  HP[K]:*Nodetype;
  Next:*HPRecType;
}
 
/* The header of the HPRec list */
HeadHPRec: *HPRecType;
/* Per-thread private variables */
rlist: listType; /* Initially empty */
rcount: integer; /* Initially 0 */

/* The retired node routine */
RetiredNode(node:*NodeType) {
  rlist.push(node);
  rcount++;
  if(rcount >= R)
    Scan(HeadHPRec);
}

/* The scan routine */
Scan(head:*HPRecType) {
  /* Stage 1: Scan HP list and insert non-null values in plist */
  plist.init();
  hprec<-head;
  while (hprec != nullNULL) {
    for (i<-0 to K-1) {
      hptr<-hprec^HP[i];
      if (hptr!= nullNULL)
        plist.insert(hptr);
    }
    hprec<-hprec^Next;
  }

  /* Stage 2: search plist */
  tmplist<-rlist.popAll();
  rcount<-0;
  node<-tmplist.pop();
  while (node != nullNULL) {
    if (plist.lookup(node)) {
      rlist.push(node);
      rcount++;
    }
    else {
      PrepareForReuse(node);
    }
    node<-tmplist.pop();
  }
  plist.free();
}

...

In the implementation, the pointer being removed is stored in the hazard pointer, preventing other threads from reusing it and thereby avoiding the ABA problem.

CODE

Code Block

bgColor	#ccccff
lang	c

#include <glib.h>
#include <glib-object.h>
 
void queue_enqueue(Queue *q, gpointer data) {
  Node *node;
  Node *tail;
  Node *next;

  node = g_slice_new(Node);
  node->data = data;
  node->next = NULL;
  while (TRUE) {
    tail = q->tail;
    HAZARD_SET(0, tail);  /* Mark tail as hazardous */
    if (tail != q->tail) {  /* Check tail hasn't changed */
      continue;
    }
    next = tail->next;
    if (tail != q->tail) {
      continue;
    }
    if (next != NULL) {
      CAS(&q->tail, tail, next);
      continue;
    }
    if (CAS(&tail->next, null, node) {
      break;
    }
  }
  CAS(&q->tail, tail, node);
}

gpointer queue_dequeue(Queue *q) {
  Node *node;
  Node *head;
  Node *tail;
  Node *next;
  gpointer data;

  while (TRUE) {
    head = q->head;
    LF_HAZARD_SET(0, head);  /* Mark head as hazardous */
    if (head != q->head) {  /* Check head hasn't changed */
      continue;
    }
    tail = q->tail;
    next = head->next;
    LF_HAZARD_SET(1, next);  /* Mark next as hazardous */
    if (head != q->head) {
      continue;
    }
    if (next == NULL) {
      return NULL; /* Empty */
    }
    if (head == tail) {
      CAS(&q->tail, tail, next);
      continue;
    }
    data = next->data;
    if (CAS(&q->head, head, next)) {
      break;
    }
  }
  LF_HAZARD_UNSET(head);  /*
                           * Retire head, and perform
                           * reclamation if needed.
                           */
  return data;
}

Compliant Solution (GNU Glib, Mutex)

In this compliant solution, mtx_lock() is used to lock the queue. When thread 1 locks on the queue to perform any operation, thread 2 cannot perform any operation on the queue, which prevents the ABA problem.

Code Block

bgColor	#ccccff
lang	c

#include <threads.h>
#include <glib-object.h>

typedef struct node_s {
  void *data;
  Node *next;
} Node;

typedef struct queue_s {
  Node *head;
  Node *tail;
  mtx_t mutex;
} Queue;

Queue* queue_new(void) {
  Queue *q = g_slice_new(sizeof(Queue));
  q->head = q->tail = g_slice_new(sizeof(Node));
  return q;
}

int queue_enqueue(Queue *q, gpointer data) {
  Node *node;
  Node *tail;
  Node *next;

  /*
   * Lock the queue before accessing the contents and
   * check the return code for success.
   */
  if (thrd_success != mtx_lock(&(q->mutex))) {
    return -1;  /* Indicate failure */
  } else {
    node = g_slice_new(Node);
    node->data = data;
    node->next = NULL;

    if(q->head == NULL) {
      q->head = node;
      q->tail = node;
    } else {
      q->tail->next = node;
      q->tail = node;
    }
    /* Unlock the mutex and chechcheck the return code */
    if (thrd_success != mtx_unlock(&(queue->mutex))) {
      return -1;  /* Indicate failure */
    }
  }
  return 0;
}

gpointer queue_dequeue(Queue *q) {
  Node *node;
  Node *head;
  Node *tail;
  Node *next;
  gpointer data;

  if (thrd_success != mtx_lock(&(q->mutex)) {
    return NULL;  /* Indicate failure */
  } else {
    head = q->head;
    tail = q->tail;
    next = head->next;
    data = next->data;
    q->head = next;
    g_slice_free(Node, head);
    if (thrd_success != mtx_unlock(&(queue->mutex))) {
      return NULL;  /* Indicate failure */
    }
  }
  return data;
}

Risk Assessment

The likelihood of having a race condition is low. Once the race condition occurs, the reading memory that has already been freed can lead to abnormal program termination or unintended information disclosure.

Rule

Recommendation	Severity	Likelihood

Remediation Cost

Detectable	Repairable	Priority	Level

CON39

CON09-C

Medium

Unlikely

No

High

No

P2

L3

Automated Detection

Tool	Version	Checker	Description

Related Vulnerabilities

Search for vulnerabilities resulting from the violation of this rule on the CERT website.

Bibliography

[Apiki 2006]	"Lock-Free Programming on AMD Multi-Core System"
[Asgher 2000]	"Practical Lock-Free Buffers"
[Michael 2004]	"Hazard Pointers"

...

Image Modified Image Modified Image Modified

Space shortcuts

Page tree

Versions Compared

Old Version 35

New Version Current

Key

Noncompliant Code Example

Compliant Solution (Mutex)

Noncompliant Code Example (GNU Glib)

Compliant Solution (GNU Glib, Hazard Pointers)

PSEUDOCODE

CODE

Compliant Solution (GNU Glib, Mutex)

Risk Assessment

Automated Detection

Related Vulnerabilities

Bibliography