GitHub user NicoK opened a pull request:

    https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/6257

    [FLINK-9676][network] clarify contracts of 
BufferListener#notifyBufferAvailable() and fix a deadlock

    ## What is the purpose of the change
    
    When recycling exclusive buffers of a `RemoteInputChannel` and recycling 
(other/floating) buffers to the buffer pool concurrently while the 
`RemoteInputChannel` is registered as a listener to the buffer pool and adding 
the exclusive buffer triggers a floating buffer to be recycled back to the same
    buffer pool, a deadlock would occur holding locks on 
`LocalBufferPool#availableMemorySegments` and `RemoteInputChannel#bufferQueue` 
but acquiring them in reverse order.
    
    One such instance would be (thanks @zhijiangW for finding this):
    
    ```
    Task canceler thread -> RemoteInputChannel1#releaseAllResources -> recycle 
floating buffers
     -> lock(LocalBufferPool#availableMemorySegments) -> 
RemoteInputChannel2#notifyBufferAvailable
     -> try to lock(RemoteInputChannel2#bufferQueue)
    ```
    ```
    Task thread -> RemoteInputChannel2#recycle
     -> lock(RemoteInputChannel2#bufferQueue) -> bufferQueue#addExclusiveBuffer 
-> floatingBuffer#recycleBuffer
     -> try to lock(LocalBufferPool#availableMemorySegments)
    ```
    
    This PR is a second approach to #6254 and solves the deadlock on the 
`LocalBufferPool` side as the other solution turned out to be even more complex 
than what's already in the PR (I'll update that PR in a second).
    @pnowojski and @tillrohrmann can you also have a quick look so that this 
can get into 1.5.1?
    
    ## Brief change log
    
    - clarify the contract of `BufferListener#notifyBufferAvailable()` (see in 
the code)
    - make sure that `LocalBufferPool#recycle()` does not break this contract, 
i.e. call the listener's callback outside the lock around 
`LocalBufferPool#availableMemorySegments`
    
    ## Verifying this change
    
    This change added tests and can be verified as follows:
    
    - added `RemoteInputChannelTest#testConcurrentRecycleAndRelease2` which 
catches this deadlock quite quickly
    
    ## Does this pull request potentially affect one of the following parts:
    
      - Dependencies (does it add or upgrade a dependency): **no**
      - The public API, i.e., is any changed class annotated with 
`@Public(Evolving)`: **no**
      - The serializers: **no**
      - The runtime per-record code paths (performance sensitive): **no** (per 
buffer, but we're only moving recycling out of the synchronized block so if 
there's any effect, it should be positive)
      - Anything that affects deployment or recovery: JobManager (and its 
components), Checkpointing, Yarn/Mesos, ZooKeeper: **no**
      - The S3 file system connector: **no**
    
    ## Documentation
    
      - Does this pull request introduce a new feature? **no**
      - If yes, how is the feature documented? **JavaDocs**


You can merge this pull request into a Git repository by running:

    $ git pull https://github.com/NicoK/flink flink-9676-lbp

Alternatively you can review and apply these changes as the patch at:

    https://github.com/apache/flink/pull/6257.patch

To close this pull request, make a commit to your master/trunk branch
with (at least) the following in the commit message:

    This closes #6257
    
----
commit d69ff968f8647efa13adcc6f338e411675b36d68
Author: Nico Kruber <nico@...>
Date:   2018-07-04T15:45:18Z

    [FLINK-9676][network] clarify contracts of 
BufferListener#notifyBufferAvailable() and fix a deadlock
    
    When recycling exclusive buffers of a RemoteInputChannel and recycling
    (other/floating) buffers to the buffer pool concurrently while the
    RemoteInputChannel is registered as a listener to the buffer pool and 
adding the
    exclusive buffer triggers a floating buffer to be recycled back to the same
    buffer pool, a deadlock would occur holding locks on
    LocalBufferPool#availableMemorySegments and RemoteInputChannel#bufferQueue 
but
    acquiring them in reverse order.
    
    One such instance would be:
    
    Task canceler thread -> RemoteInputChannel1#releaseAllResources -> recycle 
floating buffers
        -> lock(LocalBufferPool#availableMemorySegments) -> 
RemoteInputChannel2#notifyBufferAvailable
        -> try to lock(RemoteInputChannel2#bufferQueue)
    
    Task thread -> RemoteInputChannel2#recycle
        -> lock(RemoteInputChannel2#bufferQueue) -> 
bufferQueue#addExclusiveBuffer -> floatingBuffer#recycleBuffer
        -> try to lock(LocalBufferPool#availableMemorySegments)
    
    Therefore, we decouple the listener callback from lock around
    LocalBufferPool#availableMemorySegments and implicitly enforce that
    RemoteInputChannel2#bufferQueue takes precedence over this lock, i.e. must
    be acquired first and should never be taken after having locked on
    LocalBufferPool#availableMemorySegments.

----


---

Reply via email to