On Thu, 28 Apr 2022 16:09:24 +0200
Corinna Vinschen wrote:
> On Apr 28 09:42, Ken Brown wrote:
> > On 4/27/2022 10:13 AM, Takashi Yano wrote:
> > > On Fri, 1 Apr 2022 17:45:51 +0900
> > > Takashi Yano wrote:
> > > > I have tried to reproduce the issue by building OpenJDK
> > > > from source, however, I could not.
> > > >
> > > > Instead, I encountered another issue.
> > > >
> > > > Building OpenJDK sometimes (rarely) failed with error such as:
> > > >
> > > > 0 [sig] make 5484 sig_send: error sending signal 11, pid 5484,
> > > > pipe handle 0x118, nb 0, packsize 176, Win32 error 0
> > > > 124917 [main] make 5484 sig_send: error sending signal -72, pid 5484,
> > > > pipe handle 0x118, nb 0, packsize 176, Win32 error 0
> > > > common/modules/GensrcModuleInfo.gmk:77: *** open:
> > > > /home/yano/jdk/build/windows-x86-server-release/make-support/vardeps/make/common/modules/GensrcModuleInfo.gmk/jdk.accessibility/ALL_MODULES.vardeps:
> > > > No such file or directory. Stop.
> > > > make[2]: *** [make/Main.gmk:141: jdk.accessibility-gensrc-moduleinfo]
> > > > Error 2
> > > > make[2]: *** Waiting for unfinished jobs....
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > I looked into this new problem and found that wait_sig() thread
> > > > crashes with segfault. It seems that accessing _main_tls causes
> > > > access violation if a signal is sent just after the process is
> > > > started.
> > > >
> > > > static void WINAPI
> > > > wait_sig (VOID *)
> > > > {
> > > > [...]
> > > > if (!pack.mask)
> > > > {
> > > > tl_entry = cygheap->find_tls (_main_tls);
> > > > dummy_mask = _main_tls->sigmask; // <--- Segfault here
> > > > cygheap->unlock_tls (tl_entry);
> > > > pack.mask = &dummy_mask;
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > I also found the following patch resolves the issue.
> > > >
> > > > diff --git a/winsup/cygwin/sigproc.cc b/winsup/cygwin/sigproc.cc
> > > > index 62df96652..3824af199 100644
> > > > --- a/winsup/cygwin/sigproc.cc
> > > > +++ b/winsup/cygwin/sigproc.cc
> > > > @@ -1325,6 +1325,10 @@ wait_sig (VOID *)
> > > > _sig_tls = &_my_tls;
> > > > bool sig_held = false;
> > > > + /* Wait for _main_tls initialization. */
> > > > + while (!cygwin_finished_initializing)
> > > > + Sleep (10);
> > > > +
> > > > sigproc_printf ("entering ReadFile loop, my_readsig %p, my_sendsig
> > > > %p",
> > > > my_readsig, my_sendsig);
> > > >
> > > > I guess _main_tls may not be initialized correctly until
> > > > cygwin_finished_initializing is set.
> > > >
> > > > Any comments would be appreciated.
> >
> > This seems reasonable to me.
Thanks Ken and Corinna.
> Missed that, sorry. I agree this seems reasonable, but wouldn't it be
> cleaner if we *start* wait_sig only after cygwin_finished_initializing
> is set to true?
I also thought so, however, there is a comment in dcrt0.cc
as follows. So, there seems to be some reason to start
wait_sig before cygwin_finished_initialization.
/* Initialize signal processing here, early, in the hopes that the creation
of a thread early in the process will cause more predictability in memory
layout for the main thread. */
if (!dynamically_loaded)
sigproc_init ();
--
Takashi Yano <takashi.y...@nifty.ne.jp>
--
Problem reports: https://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ: https://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation: https://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info: https://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
