-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4.8k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Data Corruption With Ref Locals, Punning, and Pinned Object Heap #76929
Comments
I couldn't figure out the best area label to add to this issue. If you have write-permissions please help me learn by adding exactly one area label. |
Tagging subscribers to this area: @dotnet/gc Issue DetailsDescriptionThis was a bear to diagnose, and I'm still not 100% on what exactly is happening but the scenario is:
I first discovered this as random looking pointers getting written into those I first noticed this in .NET 7 RC ( Reproduction StepsI have a gist I used to winnow down the repro some. Latest is copied here: // drop this into a test project
[StructLayout(LayoutKind.Explicit, Size = Size)]
private struct Punned
{
internal const int Size = 8;
[FieldOffset(0)]
public ulong A;
}
/// <summary>
/// This spawns a bunch of threads, half of which do integrity checks on a punned byte[]
/// and half of which randomly replace a referenced byte[].
///
/// Sometimes things just break: either field corruption, null ref, or access violation.
///
/// Reproduces in DEBUG builds and RELEASE builds.
///
/// Tends to take < 10 iterations, but not more than 100. You know, on my machine.
///
/// Only reproduces if you use the POH, SOH and LOH are fine.
/// </summary>
[Fact]
public void Repro()
{
// DOES repro with ALLOC_SIZE >= Punned.Size
// and with USE_POH == true
//
// does not repro if USE_POH == false
// tweak these to mess with alignment and heap
const int ALLOC_SIZE = Punned.Size;
const bool USE_POH = true;
Assert.True(Punned.Size == Unsafe.SizeOf<Punned>(), "Hey, this isn't right");
Assert.True(ALLOC_SIZE >= Punned.Size, "Hey, this isn't right");
const int MAX_KEY = 1_000_000;
var iter = 0;
while (true)
{
Debug.WriteLine($"Iteration: {iter}");
iter++;
var dict = new ConcurrentDictionary<int, byte[]>();
// allocate
for (var i = 0; i < MAX_KEY; i++)
{
dict[i] = GC.AllocateArray<byte>(Punned.Size, pinned: USE_POH);
}
// start all the threads
using var startThreads = new SemaphoreSlim(0, Environment.ProcessorCount);
var modifyThreads = new Thread[Environment.ProcessorCount / 2];
for (var i = 0; i < modifyThreads.Length; i++)
{
modifyThreads[i] = ModifyingThread(i, startThreads, dict);
}
var checkThreads = new Thread[Environment.ProcessorCount - modifyThreads.Length];
using var stopCheckThreads = new SemaphoreSlim(0, checkThreads.Length);
for (var i = 0; i < checkThreads.Length; i++)
{
checkThreads[i] = IntegrityThread(i, MAX_KEY / checkThreads.Length, startThreads, stopCheckThreads, dict);
}
// let 'em go
startThreads.Release(modifyThreads.Length + checkThreads.Length);
// wait for modifying threads to finish...
for (var i = 0; i < modifyThreads.Length; i++)
{
modifyThreads[i].Join();
}
// stop check threads..
stopCheckThreads.Release(checkThreads.Length);
for (var i = 0; i < checkThreads.Length; i++)
{
checkThreads[i].Join();
}
}
static Thread IntegrityThread(
int threadIx,
int step,
SemaphoreSlim startThreads,
SemaphoreSlim stopThreads,
ConcurrentDictionary<int, byte[]> dict
)
{
using var threadStarted = new SemaphoreSlim(0, 1);
var t =
new Thread(
() =>
{
threadStarted.Release();
startThreads.Wait();
while (!stopThreads.Wait(0))
{
for (var i = 0; i < MAX_KEY; i++)
{
var keyIx = (threadIx * step + i) % MAX_KEY;
ref Punned punned = ref Pun(dict[keyIx]);
Check(ref punned);
}
}
}
);
t.Name = $"{nameof(Repro)} Integrity #{threadIx}";
t.Start();
threadStarted.Wait();
return t;
}
static Thread ModifyingThread(int threadIx, SemaphoreSlim startThreads, ConcurrentDictionary<int, byte[]> dict)
{
using var threadStarted = new SemaphoreSlim(0, 1);
var t = new
Thread(
() =>
{
threadStarted.Release();
var rand = new Random(threadIx);
startThreads.Wait();
for (var i = 0; i < 1_000_000; i++)
{
var keyIx = rand.Next(MAX_KEY);
var newArr = GC.AllocateArray<byte>(Punned.Size, pinned: USE_POH);
Assert.True(newArr.All(x => x == 0));
// make sure it comes up reasonable
ref Punned punned = ref Pun(newArr);
Assert.Equal(0UL, punned.A);
// this swaps out the only reference to a byte[]
// EXCEPT for any of the checking threads, which only
// grab it through a ref
dict.AddOrUpdate(keyIx, static (_, passed) => passed, static (_, _, passed) => passed, newArr);
}
}
);
t.Name = $"{nameof(Repro)} Modify #{threadIx}";
t.Start();
threadStarted.Wait();
return t;
}
static ref Punned Pun(byte[] data)
{
var span = data.AsSpan();
var punned = MemoryMarshal.Cast<byte, Punned>(span);
return ref punned[0];
}
static void Check(ref Punned val)
{
// all possible bit patterns are well known
var a = val.A;
Assert.True(a == 0);
}
} This will fail either in In my testing this only happens if the POH is used (toggle A old colleague had a variant using a Expected behaviorI would expect the attached code to run fine forever. Actual behaviorCrashes with some sort of data corruption. Regression?No, this reproduces (at least in part) on .NET 6. Known WorkaroundsDon't use the POH I guess? ConfigurationThis was first noticed on:
It is also reproducing, at least in part, on .NET 6. It has been reproduced on a colleagues machine as well, but I don't have the specifics beyond also x64, Windows, and .NET 7 & 6. Other informationWhen I've found a corrupted This makes me think some sort of GC bug, perhaps as part of growing or shrinking the POH, but that is ~98% guesswork.
|
For what it's worth, it reliably crashes in a few seconds with a SIGSEGV on a macOS M1, but only in release mode. This was on .NET 8 from a nightly a few days ago. More notably, it crashes for me even with |
I was able to repro on net6 and net7-rc2 on Windows, Ryzen 9 5900HS in POH mode (only); I was ultimately unable to make any significant inroads into what was actually happening, other than "bad things" I tried a few scenarios:
It certainly feels like a GC tracking error that is specific to POH reachability checks for values only reachable by interior managed pointers; however - multiple simpler scenarios that targeted exactly that: did nothing interesting and worked as expected. Perhaps relevant:
|
Anecdotal, but this might be JIT related. If I set |
@vcsjones still reproduces for me (.NET 7 RC, using POH, x64) with |
(adding a note to myself to check with Mono) Update: didn't repro on desktop mono (JIT and interp). I tried some variants with adding enough recursion to confound conservative stack scanning, too. So it seems unlikely it's some logic error in at least the shared bits of CoreLib. |
Random thought (I'm not at PC to test) - maybe a JIT size miscalculation due to the explicit struct layout? (not as random as it sounds - the last time I found a JIT bug was the "fixed buffers" size miscalculation) |
Usually a heap corruption of this sort could be related to JIT optimizations. @AndyAyersMS in case you have seen cases like this |
In my experimentation removing explicit layout, or adding kinda random padding, made no difference. I default to explicit layouts when doing tricky things with structs since I can never remember what's actually guaranteed by the compiler - given how shrunk down this repro is, it could probably be removed safely... |
If this repros with minopts and seems to be related to POH it's a bit less likely to be a JIT issue. But still possible. cc @dotnet/jit-contrib |
Judging by the stack trace it crashes in |
Hits an assert with DOTNET_HeapVerify=1 when validating a ConcurrentDictionary's Node object, namely - its members in |
The bug is understood, see here for the investigation notes. |
I assume this issue is has not been fixed in the last .net 8 preview ? |
Description
This was a bear to diagnose, and I'm still not 100% on what exactly is happening but the scenario is:
byte[]
s allocated on the POHbyte[]
s are referenced by aConcurrentDictionary
byte[]
s, and punning it viaMemoryMarshal.Cast
ref byte
and some unsafe code, but I've removed the unsafe code to eliminate it as a possible causebyte[]
s from theConcurrentDictionary
I first discovered this as random looking pointers getting written into those
byte[]
arrays, but in the process of winnowing down to a smaller reproduction null reference exceptions, seg faults, and other "you've corrupted the process"-style errors became more likely. I interpret this as the same corruption happening, but because my punned arrays are smaller the corruption is more likely to hit something else.I first noticed this in .NET 7 RC (
7.0.0-rc.1.22427.1
specifically) but it has also been reproduced in .NET 6.Reproduction Steps
I have a gist I used to winnow down the repro some.
Latest is copied here:
This will fail either in
Check
, with a null ref in an impossible place (usuallyAddOrUpdate
), or with some variant of "runtime has become corrupt". The NRE is most common with the above, but earlier revisions usually failed inCheck
.In my testing this only happens if the POH is used (toggle
USE_POH
to verify), and at all (legal) sizes for thebyte[]
s (changeALLOC_SIZE
to verify).Expected behavior
I would expect the attached code to run fine forever.
Actual behavior
Crashes with some sort of data corruption.
Regression?
No, this reproduces (at least in part) on .NET 6.
Known Workarounds
Don't use the POH I guess?
Configuration
This was first noticed on:
It is also reproducing, at least in part, on .NET 6.
It has been reproduced on a colleagues machine as well, but I don't have the specifics beyond also x64, Windows, and .NET 7 & 6.
Other information
When I've found a corrupted
byte[]
(instead of a NRE or other crash), it looks very pointer-y but seems to point to memory outside of any heap.This makes me think some sort of GC bug, perhaps as part of growing or shrinking the POH, but that is ~98% guesswork.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: