CertC++-CON41¶
Wrap functions that can fail spuriously in a loop
Required inputs: IR
Functions that can fail spuriously should be wrapped in a loop. The
atomic_compare_exchange_weak() and
atomic_compare_exchange_weak_explicit() functions both attempt to
set an atomic variable to a new value but only if it currently possesses a
known old value. Unlike the related functions
atomic_compare_exchange_strong() and
atomic_compare_exchange_strong_explicit(), these functions are
permitted to fail spuriously. This makes these functions faster on
some platforms-for example, on architectures that implement
compare-and-exchange using load-linked/store-conditional instructions, such as
Alpha, ARM, MIPS, and PowerPC. The C Standard, 7.17.7.4, paragraph 4 [
ISO/IEC
9899:2011], describes this behavior:
A weak compare-and-exchange operation may fail spuriously. That is, even when the contents of memory referred to by
expectedandobjectare equal, it may return zero and store back toexpectedthe same memory contents that were originally there.
Noncompliant Code Example
In this noncompliant code example,
reorganize_data_structure() is to be used as an argument to
thrd_create(). After reorganizing, the function attempts to
replace the head pointer so that it points to the new version. If no
other thread has changed the head pointer since it was originally loaded,
reorganize_data_structure() is intended to exit the thread with a
result of
true, indicating success. Otherwise, the new reorganization
attempt is discarded and the thread is exited with a result of
false. However,
atomic_compare_exchange_weak() may fail even when the head pointer
has not changed. Therefore,
reorganize_data_structure() may perform the work and then discard
it unnecessarily.
#include <stdatomic.h>
#include <stdbool.h>
struct data {
struct data *next;
/* ... */
};
extern void cleanup_data_structure(struct data *head);
int reorganize_data_structure(void *thread_arg) {
struct data *_Atomic *ptr_to_head = thread_arg;
struct data *old_head = atomic_load(ptr_to_head);
struct data *new_head;
bool success;
/* ... Reorganize the data structure ... */
success = atomic_compare_exchange_weak(ptr_to_head,
&old_head, new_head);
if (!success) {
cleanup_data_structure(new_head);
}
return success; /* Exit the thread */
}
Compliant Solution (
atomic_compare_exchange_weak())
To recover from spurious failures, a loop must be used. However,
atomic_compare_exchange_weak() might fail because the head pointer
changed, or the failure may be spurious. In either case, the thread must
perform the work repeatedly until the compare-and-exchange succeeds, as shown
in this compliant solution:
#include <stdatomic.h>
#include <stdbool.h>
#include <stddef.h>
struct data {
struct data *next;
/* ... */
};
extern void cleanup_data_structure(struct data *head);
int reorganize_data_structure(void *thread_arg) {
struct data *_Atomic *ptr_to_head = thread_arg;
struct data *old_head = atomic_load(ptr_to_head);
struct data *new_head = NULL;
struct data *saved_old_head;
bool success;
do {
if (new_head != NULL) {
cleanup_data_structure(new_head);
}
saved_old_head = old_head;
/* ... Reorganize the data structure ... */
} while (!(success = atomic_compare_exchange_weak(
ptr_to_head, &old_head, new_head
)) && old_head == saved_old_head);
return success; /* Exit the thread */
}
This loop could also be part of a larger control flow; for example, the thread
from the noncompliant code example could be retried if it returns
false.
Compliant Solution (
atomic_compare_exchange_strong())
When a weak compare-and-exchange would require a loop and a strong one would not, the strong one is preferable, as in this compliant solution:
#include <stdatomic.h>
#include <stdbool.h>
struct data {
struct data *next;
/* ... */
};
extern void cleanup_data_structure(struct data *head);
int reorganize_data_structure(void *thread_arg) {
struct data *_Atomic *ptr_to_head = thread_arg;
struct data *old_head = atomic_load(ptr_to_head);
struct data *new_head;
bool success;
/* ... Reorganize the data structure ... */
success = atomic_compare_exchange_strong(
ptr_to_head, &old_head, new_head
);
if (!success) {
cleanup_data_structure(new_head);
}
return success; /* Exit the thread */
}
Risk Assessment
Failing to wrap the
atomic_compare_exchange_weak() and
atomic_compare_exchange_weak_explicit() functions in a loop can
result in incorrect values and control flow.
| Rule | Severity | Likelihood | Remediation Cost | Priority | Level |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CON41-C | Low | Unlikely | Medium | P2 | L3 |
Related Guidelines
| Taxonomy | Taxonomy item | Relationship |
|---|---|---|
| CERT Oracle Secure Coding Standard for Java | THI03-J. Always invoke wait() and await() methods inside a loop | Prior to 2018-01-12: CERT: Unspecified Relationship |
Bibliography
| [ ISO/IEC 9899:2011] | 7.17.7.4, "The
atomic_compare_exchange Generic Functions"
|
| [ Lea 2000] | 1.3.2, "Liveness" 3.2.2, "Monitor Mechanics" |
Possible Messages
Key |
Text |
Severity |
Disabled |
|---|---|---|---|
call_outside_loop |
Wrap functions that can fail spuriously in a loop. |
None |
False |
Options¶
This rule shares the following common options: exclude_in_macros, exclude_messages_in_system_headers, excludes, extend_exclude_to_macro_invocations, includes, justification_checker, languages, post_processing, provider, report_at, severity
The following places define options that affect this rule: Stylechecks, Analysis-GlobalOptions
spuriously_failing_routines¶
spuriously_failing_routines : set[bauhaus.analysis.config.QualifiedName] = {'atomic_compare_exchange_weak', 'atomic_compare_exchange_weak_explicit'}