comparison src/thread/win32/SDL_syssem.c @ 3069:caefe2344f65

Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2007 07:38:25 +0000 From: John Bartholomew Subject: [SDL] SDL Semaphore implementation broken on Windows? Hi, Over the past couple of days, I've been battling with SDL, SDL_Mixer and SMPEG to try to find an audio hang bug. I believe I've found the problem, which I think is a race condition inside SDL's semaphore implementation (at least the Windows implementation). The semaphore code uses Windows' built in semaphore functions, but it also maintains a separate count value. This count value is updated with bare increment and decrement operations in SemPost and SemWaitTimeout - no locking primitives to protect them. In tracking down the apparent audio bug, I found that at some point a semaphore's count value was being decremented to -1, which is clearly not a valid value for it to take. I'm still not certain exactly what sequence of operations is occuring for this to happen, but I believe that overall it's a race condition between a thread calling SemPost (which increments the count) and the thread on the other end calling SemWait (which decrements it). I will try to make a test case to verify this, but I'm not sure if I'll be able to (threading errors being difficult to reproduce even in the best circumstances). However, assuming this is the cause of my problems, there is a very simple fix: Windows provides InterlockedIncrement() and InterlockedDecrement() functions to perform increments and decrements which are guaranteed to be atomic. So the fix is in thread/win32/SDL_syssem.c: replace occurrences of --sem->count with InterlockedDecrement(&sem->count); and replace occurrences of ++sem->count with InterlockedIncrement(&sem->count); This is using SDL v1.2.12, built with VC++ 2008 Express, running on a Core 2 duo processor.
author Sam Lantinga <slouken@libsdl.org>
date Tue, 17 Feb 2009 05:39:18 +0000
parents 99210400e8b9
children 6f3308d4b6cd
comparison
equal deleted inserted replaced
3068:b21348d47cab 3069:caefe2344f65
107 switch (WaitForSemaphoreCE(sem->id, dwMilliseconds)) { 107 switch (WaitForSemaphoreCE(sem->id, dwMilliseconds)) {
108 #else 108 #else
109 switch (WaitForSingleObject(sem->id, dwMilliseconds)) { 109 switch (WaitForSingleObject(sem->id, dwMilliseconds)) {
110 #endif 110 #endif
111 case WAIT_OBJECT_0: 111 case WAIT_OBJECT_0:
112 --sem->count; 112 InterlockedDecrement(&sem->count);
113 retval = 0; 113 retval = 0;
114 break; 114 break;
115 case WAIT_TIMEOUT: 115 case WAIT_TIMEOUT:
116 retval = SDL_MUTEX_TIMEDOUT; 116 retval = SDL_MUTEX_TIMEDOUT;
117 break; 117 break;
156 /* Increase the counter in the first place, because 156 /* Increase the counter in the first place, because
157 * after a successful release the semaphore may 157 * after a successful release the semaphore may
158 * immediately get destroyed by another thread which 158 * immediately get destroyed by another thread which
159 * is waiting for this semaphore. 159 * is waiting for this semaphore.
160 */ 160 */
161 ++sem->count; 161 InterlockedIncrement(&sem->count);
162 #if defined(_WIN32_WCE) && (_WIN32_WCE < 300) 162 #if defined(_WIN32_WCE) && (_WIN32_WCE < 300)
163 if (ReleaseSemaphoreCE(sem->id, 1, NULL) == FALSE) { 163 if (ReleaseSemaphoreCE(sem->id, 1, NULL) == FALSE) {
164 #else 164 #else
165 if (ReleaseSemaphore(sem->id, 1, NULL) == FALSE) { 165 if (ReleaseSemaphore(sem->id, 1, NULL) == FALSE) {
166 #endif 166 #endif
167 --sem->count; /* restore */ 167 InterlockedDecrement(&sem->count); /* restore */
168 SDL_SetError("ReleaseSemaphore() failed"); 168 SDL_SetError("ReleaseSemaphore() failed");
169 return -1; 169 return -1;
170 } 170 }
171 return 0; 171 return 0;
172 } 172 }