public inbox for [email protected]
help / color / mirror / Atom feedFrom: Michael Paquier <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Subject: pgsql: Fix race conditions in ProcKill()'s lock-group freelist handling
Date: Wed, 27 May 2026 05:53:10 +0000
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
Fix race conditions in ProcKill()'s lock-group freelist handling
This commit fixes two bugs in ProcKill()'s lock-group teardown freelist
publication:
* a double push of the leader's PGPROC that corrupts the freelist.
* a leak of the last follower's PGPROC slot.
ProcKill()'s lock-group teardown had two PGPROC freelist updates
scattered through the function, done under two separate freeProcsLock
acquisitions:
* A follower's push of the leader's PGPROC, done when a follower is the
last group member exiting.
* Every backend's self-push at the bottom of the function.
The two freelist updates were coordinated only by inspecting
proc->lockGroupLeader, which a follower could clear as a side effect of
pushing the leader. This coordination was broken. For example, with
two concurrent backends:
* The follower clears leader->lockGroupLeader and pushes the leader's
PGPROC under leader_lwlock.
* The follower does not clear its own proc->lockGroupLeader, being
skipped.
* When the leader reaches the bottom of ProcKill(), it sees a NULL
proc->lockGroupLeader (the follower cleared it) and pushes itself,
causing a second dlist_push_tail() of the same node onto the same
freelist.
* The follower at the bottom sees its own proc->lockGroupLeader being
not NULL (never cleared) and skips its own push, causing its own slot
to leak.
This commit refactors the freelist manipulation to be done in two
distinct phases, each step using its own lock acquisition to ensure that
each freelist operation happens in an isolated manner for each backend
(follower or leader):
- First, under a single leader_lwlock acquisition, check the state of
the lock-group. Depending on if we are dealing with a follower and/or a
leader, and if the leader has exited before a follower, then set some
state booleans that define which actions should be taken with the
freelist.
- Second, under a single freeProcsLock acquisition, perform the cleanup
actions, self-push of a backend and/or push of the leader back to the
freelist.
This is an old issue, dating back to 9.6 where parallel workers and lock
grouping has been added.
Author: Vlad Lesin <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Andrey Borodin <[email protected]>
Reviewed-by: Michael Paquier <[email protected]>
Discussion: https://postgr.es/m/[email protected]
Backpatch-through: 14
Branch
------
REL_15_STABLE
Details
-------
https://git.postgresql.org/pg/commitdiff/d5cc6df608018f4dbf32542fe6bec405d2d770c0
Modified Files
--------------
src/backend/storage/lmgr/proc.c | 79 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------------
1 file changed, 53 insertions(+), 26 deletions(-)
view thread (6+ messages) latest in thread
reply
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
reply via email
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected], [email protected]
Subject: Re: pgsql: Fix race conditions in ProcKill()'s lock-group freelist handling
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox