Hi,
On 2023-01-30 06:26:02 +1300, Thomas Munro wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 30, 2023 at 1:53 AM Tomas Vondra
> <tomas.von...@enterprisedb.com> wrote:
> > So I did that - same configure options as the buildfarm client, and a
> > 'make check' (with only tests up to the 'join' suite, because that's
> > where it got stuck before). And it took only ~15 runs (~1h) to hit this
> > again on dikkop.
>
> That's good news.
Indeed.
As annoying as it is, it might be worth reproing it once or twice more, just
to have a feeling for how long we need to run to have confidence in a fix.
> I was talking to Andres on IM about this yesterday and he pointed out
> a potential out-of-order hazard: WaitEventSetWait() sets "waiting" (to
> tell the signal handler to write to the self-pipe) and then reads
> latch->is_set with neither compiler nor memory barrier, which doesn't
> seem right because we might see a value of latch->is_set from before
> "waiting" was true, and yet the signal handler might also have run
> while "waiting" was false so the self-pipe doesn't save us, despite
> the length of the comment about that. Can you reproduce it with this
> change?
>
> --- a/src/backend/storage/ipc/latch.c
> +++ b/src/backend/storage/ipc/latch.c
> @@ -1011,6 +1011,7 @@ WaitEventSetWait(WaitEventSet *set, long timeout,
> * ordering, so that we cannot miss seeing is_set if a
> notificat
> ion
> * has already been queued.
> */
> + pg_memory_barrier();
> if (set->latch && set->latch->is_set)
> {
> occurred_events->fd = PGINVALID_SOCKET;
I think we need a barrier in SetLatch(), after is_set = true. We have that in
some of the newer branches (due to the maybe_sleeping logic), but not in the
older branches.
Greetings,
Andres Freund
