python / python/cpython

`list.remove` is not atomic for non trivial `__eq__` comparisons

Offen
#148,259 11 Kommentare 0 Reaktionen 0 zugewiesene Personen Auf GitHub ansehen

Dieses Issue hat noch niemand übernommen.

interpreter-core topic-free-threading triaged type-bug
Vorherrschende Sprache
Python
Sterne
77.2k
Forks
35.9k
PR-Merge-Kennzahlen
PR-Kennzahlen ausstehend

Beschreibung

Bug report

Bug

I found a race condition on the free-threaded build at 72eca2af59043c78647b0e6be3777a947ea9ef0f happening in list.remove.

The long story short is if whatever PyObject_RichCompareBool does releases the GIL, the critical section no longer protects the list's state from other threads, which may then mutate the list and result in the wrong item being removed later.

This is the current code for list.remove with comments around the problematic logic.

static PyObject *
list_remove_impl(PyListObject *self, PyObject *value)
{
    Py_ssize_t i;
    for (i = 0; i < Py_SIZE(self); i++) {
        // read the contents under lock
        PyObject *obj = self->ob_item[i];
        Py_INCREF(obj);
        // this may release the GIL, suspending the critical section
        int cmp = PyObject_RichCompareBool(obj, value, Py_EQ);
        Py_DECREF(obj);
        // it is possible that obj (which we want to remove) isn't at
        // position i anymore as other threads may have mutated 
        // the list...
        if (cmp > 0) {
            // ... but we still remove it!
            if (list_ass_slice_lock_held(self, i, i+1, NULL) == 0)
                Py_RETURN_NONE;
            return NULL;
        }
    }
    ...
}

I'm not sure whether a crash can occur from that race condition (e.g. i is the position of the last element in the list and another thread pops the last element), but regardless I think there's a correctness issue with that race condition.

It's a bit hard to come up with a reproducer due to the race condition happening under pretty specific circumstances but I can try to make (or generate) one if needed.

Possible fixes

The simplest thing I can think of is re-comparing ob_item[i] with obj after PyObject_RichCompareBool has returned to make sure the state of the list, at least as far as this specific item's position is concerned, hasn't changed, and raising a RuntimeError if not.

Alternatively, I looked at other containers and it seems like deque has a state field which is incremented every time a mutating operation is done on it; if the state value changes in an unexpected manner during mutations, it raises a RuntimeError (I don't think list has anything like that currently).

I already have a branch in my fork that implements the former "fix", but I'm also open to working on the latter if there's interest in it.

CPython versions tested on:

CPython main branch

Operating systems tested on:

macOS

Linked PRs
  • gh-148440

Beitragsleitfaden

Beitragsleitfaden öffnen

Erste Schritte

  1. Lies das ganze Issue und danach den Beitragsleitfaden des Projekts.
  2. Schreib ins Issue, dass du es übernimmst — das erspart doppelte Arbeit.
  3. Forke das Repository und arbeite in einem Branch.
  4. Öffne einen Pull Request, der die Issue-Nummer nennt.

Rechercherichtung

Beginne mit der Überprüfung von list_remove_impl und des im Bericht gezeigten Aufrufs von PyObject_RichCompareBool und untersuche dann den verknüpften PR gh-148440 sowie den Branch des Reporters auf die aktuelle Richtung. Als abgeschlossen sollte gelten, dass list.remove nicht das falsche Element entfernen kann, wenn der Vergleich den GIL freigibt, und dass die gemeldete Race Condition durch Tests abgedeckt ist.

Vom Indexierungsmodell aus dem Issue-Text verfasst.

Bewertung

Tech-Stack
python
Bereich
backend
Issue-Typ
Bug
Schwierigkeit
5/5
Geschätzter Aufwand
Über eine Woche
Aktivitätsstatus
Veraltet
Klarheit
Größtenteils klar
Anfängerfreundlichkeit
25/100

Neue Issues direkt in Ihr Postfach

Eine kurze Übersicht über anfängerfreundliche GitHub-Issues.