nogil violation of atomicity on set operations
Nadie ha tomado este issue todavía.
- Lenguaje dominante
- Python
- Estrellas
- 77.2k
- Forks
- 35.9k
- Métricas de merge de PR
- Métricas de PR pendientes
Descripción
Bug report
Bug description:
Hi,
We're a research group focused on testing concurrent runtimes. Our work-in-progress prototype found a violation of atomicity on the current nogil build when using concurrent operations on the same set. The program below shows the wrong behavior.
from threading import Thread,Barrier
def t1(b1,s):
b1.wait()
s.intersection_update({1,5})
def t2(b1,s):
b1.wait()
s.symmetric_difference_update({1, 8, 7, 5, 9})
def normalSetTest(i):
s = {1,2,3,4,5,6}
setCombos = [{7,8,9}, set()] # all possible results
barrier = Barrier(2)
threads = [ Thread(target= t1, args=(barrier,s,)), Thread(target= t2, args=(barrier,s,)) ]
for t in threads:
t.start()
for t in threads:
t.join()
if s not in setCombos:
print("\tfound bug on iter " + str(i) + ": " + str(s))
print("test begin...")
for n in range(0,2000):
threads = []
if n % 100 == 0:
print(n)
for i in range(0,100):
threads.append(Thread(target= normalSetTest, args=(n,)))
for t in threads:
t.start()
for t in threads:
t.join()
print("test done")
A set starts with {1,2,3,4,5,6} and two threads each make a concurrent operation on it: intersection_update({1,5}) and symmetric_difference_update({1, 8, 7, 5, 9}).
Depending on the order of execution, the possible results are either {7,8,9} or {} (the empty set).
Running the test harness above shows that the (incorrect) result {1, 5} is sometimes possible.
If you have trouble observing this behavior, feel free to increase the first range's last argument to a large integer (e.g., from 2000 to 10000).
We replicated this bug on 3 different machines with varying numbers of cores; and we were able to find it even using a single pair of threads (i.e., the second range's argument from 100 to 1). The current harness uses 100 pairs of threads operating on unrelated sets to speed up bug discovery.
We're happy to provide more details about this bug, and to help developers reproducing it.
Output of python -VV: Python 3.14.0a1+ experimental free-threading build (heads/main:faa3272fb8d, Oct 29 2024, 09:14:25) [GCC 14.2.1 20240805]
Example output:
test begin...
0
100
200
300
found bug on iter 346: {1, 5}
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
1100
1200
1300
1400
1500
1600
found bug on iter 1678: {1, 5}
1700
1800
found bug on iter 1864: {1, 5}
found bug on iter 1882: {1, 5}
1900
test Done
@flypoodles and @overlorde are part of the team, adding them so they get notified about further discussion.
CPython versions tested on:
3.13, 3.14, CPython main branch
Operating systems tested on:
Linux
Guía de contribución
Primeros pasos
- Lee el issue completo y luego la guía de contribución del proyecto.
- Comenta en el issue que vas a ocuparte — evita que dos personas hagan lo mismo.
- Haz un fork del repositorio y trabaja en una rama.
- Abre un pull request que haga referencia al número del issue.
Línea de trabajo
Comienza ejecutando el threading harness proporcionado en una compilación free-threading de CPython e inspecciona los puntos de entrada de las operaciones de conjuntos implicados en intersection_update y symmetric_difference_update. Reproduce el resultado incorrecto {1, 5} y después añade una prueba de regresión específica que cubra actualizaciones concurrentes; se considera terminado cuando solo se observen los dos resultados documentados, {7, 8, 9} o {}.
Escrito por el modelo de indexación a partir del texto del issue.
Evaluación
- Stack tecnológico
- python
- Área
- backend
- Tipo de issue
- Error
- Dificultad
- 4/5
- Tiempo estimado
- 3-5 días
- Estado de actividad
- Estancado
- Claridad
- Bastante claro
- Aptitud para principiantes
- 38/100