On Wednesday, 17 April 2024 05:01:32 CDT Peter Zijlstra wrote:
=================================== NT synchronization primitive driver ===================================
This page documents the user-space API for the ntsync driver.
ntsync is a support driver for emulation of NT synchronization primitives by user-space NT emulators. It exists because implementation in user-space, using existing tools, cannot match Windows performance while offering accurate semantics. It is implemented entirely in software, and does not drive any hardware device.
This interface is meant as a compatibility tool only, and should not be used for general synchronization. Instead use generic, versatile interfaces such as futex(2) and poll(2).
Synchronization primitives
The ntsync driver exposes three types of synchronization primitives: semaphores, mutexes, and events.
A semaphore holds a single volatile 32-bit counter, and a static 32-bit integer denoting the maximum value. It is considered signaled when the counter is nonzero. The counter is decremented by one when a wait is satisfied. Both the initial and maximum count are established when the semaphore is created.
A mutex holds a volatile 32-bit recursion count, and a volatile 32-bit identifier denoting its owner. A mutex is considered signaled when its owner is zero (indicating that it is not owned). The recursion count is incremented when a wait is satisfied, and ownership is set to the given identifier.
'signaled' is used twice now but not defined. For both Semaphore and Mutex this seems to indicate uncontended? Edit: seems to be needs-wakeup more than uncontended.
Uncontended, yes, or needs-wakeup (I'm not sure what the difference between the two is?)
A mutex also holds an internal flag denoting whether its previous owner has died; such a mutex is said to be abandoned. Owner death is not tracked automatically based on thread death, but rather must be communicated using NTSYNC_IOC_MUTEX_KILL. An abandoned mutex is inherently considered unowned.
Except for the "unowned" semantics of zero, the actual value of the owner identifier is not interpreted by the ntsync driver at all. The intended use is to store a thread identifier; however, the ntsync driver does not actually validate that a calling thread provides consistent or unique identifiers.
Why not verify it? Seems simple enough to put in a TID check, esp. if NT mandates the same.
I mostly figured it'd be simplest to leave the driver completely agnostic, but I don't think there's any reason we can't use the real TID for most calls.
An event holds a volatile boolean state denoting whether it is signaled or not. There are two types of events, auto-reset and manual-reset. An auto-reset event is designaled when a wait is satisfied; a manual-reset event is not. The event type is specified when the event is created.
But what is an event? I'm familiar with semaphores and mutexes, but less so with events.
It's what I'm trying to define there, a single bit of state that's either contended or not. It acts broadly like an eventfd, in that you can wake (write) or wait (read), but without the distinction of having different nonzero values in the internal counter.
You could also think of it as a semaphore with a maximum count of one. However, unlike a semaphore it also supports the "pulse" operation, and you can also have "manual-reset" events that *don't* change state when you wait on them (no equivalent for regular semaphores).
Unless specified otherwise, all operations on an object are atomic and totally ordered with respect to other operations on the same object.
Objects are represented by files. When all file descriptors to an object are closed, that object is deleted.
Char device
The ntsync driver creates a single char device /dev/ntsync. Each file description opened on the device represents a unique instance intended to back an individual NT virtual machine. Objects created by one ntsync instance may only be used with other objects created by the same instance.
ioctl reference
All operations on the device are done through ioctls. There are four structures used in ioctl calls::
struct ntsync_sem_args { __u32 sem; __u32 count; __u32 max; };
struct ntsync_mutex_args { __u32 mutex; __u32 owner; __u32 count; };
struct ntsync_event_args { __u32 event; __u32 signaled; __u32 manual; };
struct ntsync_wait_args { __u64 timeout; __u64 objs; __u32 count; __u32 owner; __u32 index; __u32 alert; __u32 flags; __u32 pad; };
Depending on the ioctl, members of the structure may be used as input, output, or not at all. All ioctls return 0 on success.
The ioctls on the device file are as follows:
NTSYNC_IOC_CREATE_SEM
Create a semaphore object. Takes a pointer to struct ntsync_sem_args, which is used as follows:
* sem: On output, contains a file descriptor to the created semaphore. * count: Initial count of the semaphore. * max: Maximum count of the semaphore.
Fails with EINVAL if `count` is greater than `max`.
So the implication is that @count and @max are input argument and as such should be set before calling the ioctl()?
It would not have been weird to have the ioctl() return the fd on success I suppose, instead of mixing input and output arguments like this, but whatever, this works.
I think that would have been fine, and I could still change it accordingly. The reason I didn't do that was that [1] advises against it (although I don't know why).
[1] https://docs.kernel.org/driver-api/ioctl.html#return-code
The ioctls on the individual objects are as follows:
NTSYNC_IOC_SEM_POST
Post to a semaphore object. Takes a pointer to a 32-bit integer, which on input holds the count to be added to the semaphore, and on output contains its previous count.
If adding to the semaphore's current count would raise the latter past the semaphore's maximum count, the ioctl fails with EOVERFLOW and the semaphore is not affected. If raising the semaphore's count causes it to become signaled, eligible threads waiting on this semaphore will be woken and the semaphore's count decremented appropriately.
Urg, so this is the traditional V (vrijgeven per Dijkstra, release in English), but now 'conveniently' called POST, such that it can be readily confused with the P operation (passering, or passing) which it is not.
Glorious :-/
You're of course going to tell me NT did this and you can't help this naming foible.
No, NT calls it "release" (and the operation on a mutex is also "release" rather than "unlock".) I called it "post" after POSIX semaphores, on the idea that it'd be more familiar to a Unix developer (and shorter). I see I was wrong, so I'll rename it to "release".
NTSYNC_IOC_MUTEX_UNLOCK
Release a mutex object. Takes a pointer to struct ntsync_mutex_args, which is used as follows:
* mutex: Ignored. * owner: Specifies the owner trying to release this mutex. * count: On output, contains the previous recursion count.
If "owner" is zero, the ioctl fails with EINVAL. If "owner" is not the current owner of the mutex, the ioctl fails with EPERM.
ISTR you having written elsewhere that NT actually demands mutexes to be strictly per thread, which for the above would mandate @owner to be current, no?
Right. We could replace owner with current everywhere except for NTSYNC_IOC_KILL_OWNER.
The mutex's count will be decremented by one. If decrementing the mutex's count causes it to become zero, the mutex is marked as unowned and signaled, and eligible threads waiting on it will be woken as appropriate.
NTSYNC_IOC_SET_EVENT
Signal an event object. Takes a pointer to a 32-bit integer, which on output contains the previous state of the event.
Eligible threads will be woken, and auto-reset events will be designaled appropriately.
Hmm, so the event thing is like a simple wait-wake scheme? Where the 'signaled' bit is used as the wakeup state?
Yes, exactly.
NTSYNC_IOC_RESET_EVENT
Designal an event object. Takes a pointer to a 32-bit integer, which on output contains the previous state of the event.
NTSYNC_IOC_PULSE_EVENT
Wake threads waiting on an event object while leaving it in an unsignaled state. Takes a pointer to a 32-bit integer, which on output contains the previous state of the event.
A pulse operation can be thought of as a set followed by a reset, performed as a single atomic operation. If two threads are waiting on an auto-reset event which is pulsed, only one will be woken. If two threads are waiting a manual-reset event which is pulsed, both will be woken. However, in both cases, the event will be unsignaled afterwards, and a simultaneous read operation will always report the event as unsignaled.
*groan*
Yep :D
This one is terrible, and it's the only one that Microsoft has come out and explicitly said "don't use this". Supposedly their kernel is even coded such that if a waiting thread gets hit by an interrupt that the pulse will go unnoticed, although I've tried to reproduce this in practice and been unsuccessful.
But of course it's terrible regardless, because you never know if your thread is waiting or not. In practice it seems to usually be used on a timer, though, so that part doesn't matter as much.
NTSYNC_IOC_READ_SEM
Read the current state of a semaphore object. Takes a pointer to struct ntsync_sem_args, which is used as follows:
* sem: Ignored. * count: On output, contains the current count of the semaphore. * max: On output, contains the maximum count of the semaphore.
This seems inherently racy -- what is the intended purpose of this interface?
Specifically the moment a value is returned, either P or V operations can change it, rendering the (as yet unused) return value incorrect.
I have no idea what it's intended for. Actually it's not even exposed as a documented API, only an undocumented one. But it does work, and applications use it.
NTSYNC_IOC_READ_MUTEX
Read the current state of a mutex object. Takes a pointer to struct ntsync_mutex_args, which is used as follows:
* mutex: Ignored. * owner: On output, contains the current owner of the mutex, or zero if the mutex is not currently owned. * count: On output, contains the current recursion count of the mutex.
If the mutex is marked as abandoned, the function fails with EOWNERDEAD. In this case, "count" and "owner" are set to zero.
Another questionable interface. I suspect you're going to be telling me NT has them so you have to have them, but urgh.
Unfortunately yes.
NTSYNC_IOC_READ_EVENT
Read the current state of an event object. Takes a pointer to struct ntsync_event_args, which is used as follows:
* event: Ignored. * signaled: On output, contains the current state of the event. * manual: On output, contains 1 if the event is a manual-reset event, and 0 otherwise.
I can't help but notice all those @sem, @mutex, @event 'output' members being unused except for create. Seems like a waste to have them.
Yes, mostly so I could reuse the existing structures.
On the other hand if there's no reason not to return fds from the create ioctls, then we could just remove those members.
NTSYNC_IOC_KILL_OWNER
Mark a mutex as unowned and abandoned if it is owned by the given owner. Takes an input-only pointer to a 32-bit integer denoting the owner. If the owner is zero, the ioctl fails with EINVAL. If the owner does not own the mutex, the function fails with EPERM.
Eligible threads waiting on the mutex will be woken as appropriate (and such waits will fail with EOWNERDEAD, as described below).
Wine will use this when it detects a thread exit I suppose.
Exactly.
NTSYNC_IOC_WAIT_ANY
Poll on any of a list of objects, atomically acquiring at most one. Takes a pointer to struct ntsync_wait_args, which is used as follows:
* timeout: Absolute timeout in nanoseconds. If NTSYNC_WAIT_REALTIME is set, the timeout is measured against the REALTIME clock; otherwise it is measured against the MONOTONIC clock. If the timeout is equal to or earlier than the current time, the function returns immediately without sleeping. If "timeout" is U64_MAX, the function will sleep until an object is signaled, and will not fail with ETIMEDOUT. * objs: Pointer to an array of "count" file descriptors (specified as an integer so that the structure has the same size regardless of architecture). If any object is invalid, the function fails with EINVAL. * count: Number of objects specified in the "objs" array. If greater than NTSYNC_MAX_WAIT_COUNT, the function fails with EINVAL. * owner: Mutex owner identifier. If any object in "objs" is a mutex, the ioctl will attempt to acquire that mutex on behalf of "owner". If "owner" is zero, the ioctl fails with EINVAL.
Again, should that not be current? That is, why not maintain the NT invariant and mandates TIDs and avoid the arguments in both cases?
I don't think there's any particular reason.
* index: On success, contains the index (into "objs") of the object which was signaled. If "alert" was signaled instead, this contains "count".
Could be the actual return value, no? Edit: no it cannot be because -EOWNERDEAD case below.
Yeah. Again the advice about "only return zero from an ioctl", too.
Although we could also use a bit in the return value (which is also kind of what NT does).
A semaphore is considered to be signaled if its count is nonzero, and is acquired by decrementing its count by one. A mutex is considered to be signaled if it is unowned or if its owner matches the "owner" argument, and is acquired by incrementing its recursion count by one and setting its owner to the "owner" argument. An auto-reset event is acquired by designaling it; a manual-reset event is not affected by acquisition.
Acquisition is atomic and totally ordered with respect to other operations on the same object. If two wait operations (with different "owner" identifiers) are queued on the same mutex, only one is signaled. If two wait operations are queued on the same semaphore, and a value of one is posted to it, only one is signaled. The order in which threads are signaled is not specified.
Note that you do list the lack of guarantee here, but not above. I suspect both cases are similar and guarantee nothing.
There's no documented guarantee in either case, but when testing in controlled well-ordered environments, NtWaitForMultipleObjects() always acquires the lowest index first, and I think wakes are FIFO. I'm not really sure why I specified the guarantee for the former but not the latter.
The "alert" argument is an "extra" event which can terminate the wait, independently of all other objects. If members of "objs" and "alert" are both simultaneously signaled, a member of "objs" will always be given priority and acquired first.
It is valid to pass the same object more than once, including by passing the same event in the "objs" array and in "alert". If a wakeup occurs due to that object being signaled, "index" is set to the lowest index corresponding to that object.
Urgh, is this an actual guarantee? This almost seems to imply that at [A] above we can indeed guarantee the lowest indexed object is acquired first.
It's definitely legal in NT to pass the same object more than once (in wait-for-any, not wait-for-all though), and it's definitely the case that (at least in controlled well-ordered environments) the lowest index is acquired first. I don't know of any application that definitely depends on either of these, and they're not documented behaviours, but Wine has implemented those behaviours and it would make me nervous to break them here.
The part about passing the same event in "alert" and "objs" is not part of NT exactly (in NT the "alert" isn't even an event; it's a special bit of thread state; we just use an event for simplicity). I think I specified it just to avoid coding an extra check (since it should Just Work), while also making it clear that case was considered.
The function may fail with EINTR if a signal is received.
In which case @index must be disregarded since nothing will be acquired, right?
So far nothing really weird, and I'm thinking futexes should be able to do all this, no?
Even disregarding wait-for-all, futexes aren't really good enough. Wait operations need to consume state, and while we could put that state in user space (and in fact we *do* have an out of tree patch set that kind of does this) that requires all that state to be shared across processes, which is a problem since we want processes to be isolated unless they explicitly share objects with each other. There's not a scalable way to achieve this, especially since you can share objects lazily.
You also cannot do NtPulseEvent() this way. The aforementioned patch set badly emulates it and it does in practice break any application that uses it. Similarly there are some applications that do a weird "fake pulse" where they set and then immediately reset an event from the same thread, and expect that to always wake.
On Wednesday, April 17, 2024 3:02:13 PM CDT Elizabeth Figura wrote:
Except for the "unowned" semantics of zero, the actual value of the owner identifier is not interpreted by the ntsync driver at all. The intended use is to store a thread identifier; however, the ntsync driver does not actually validate that a calling thread provides consistent or unique identifiers.
Why not verify it? Seems simple enough to put in a TID check, esp. if NT mandates the same.
I mostly figured it'd be simplest to leave the driver completely agnostic, but I don't think there's any reason we can't use the real TID for most calls.
While trying to implement this I did realize a reason: if a Linux thread dies and a new Wine thread is created which happens to have the same Linux TID *before* Wine notices the thread death, that thread's TID will be conflated with the thread that died. I don't think we can guarantee that we notice thread death before we notice a request to create a new Wine thread.
Using Wine-managed TIDs avoids this by virtue of ensuring that a Wine TID is not reused until the associated Wine thread has been cleaned up.