mirror of
https://github.com/github/codeql.git
synced 2025-12-18 01:33:15 +01:00
Merge pull request #786 from aschackmull/java/double-checked-locking
Java: Fix FP in DoubleCheckedLocking.ql
This commit is contained in:
@@ -15,9 +15,26 @@
|
||||
import java
|
||||
import DoubleCheckedLocking
|
||||
|
||||
predicate allFieldsFinal(Class c) { forex(Field f | c.inherits(f) | f.isFinal()) }
|
||||
|
||||
predicate immutableFieldType(Type t) {
|
||||
allFieldsFinal(t) or
|
||||
t instanceof ImmutableType
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
from IfStmt if1, IfStmt if2, SynchronizedStmt sync, Field f
|
||||
where
|
||||
doubleCheckedLocking(if1, if2, sync, f) and
|
||||
not f.isVolatile()
|
||||
not f.isVolatile() and
|
||||
not (
|
||||
// Non-volatile double-checked locking is ok when the object is immutable and
|
||||
// there is only a single non-synchronized field read.
|
||||
immutableFieldType(f.getType()) and
|
||||
1 = strictcount(FieldAccess fa |
|
||||
fa.getField() = f and
|
||||
fa.getEnclosingCallable() = sync.getEnclosingCallable() and
|
||||
not fa.getEnclosingStmt().getParent*() = sync.getBlock()
|
||||
)
|
||||
)
|
||||
select sync, "Double-checked locking on the non-volatile field $@ is not thread-safe.", f,
|
||||
f.toString()
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -38,6 +38,5 @@ predicate doubleCheckedLocking(IfStmt if1, IfStmt if2, SynchronizedStmt sync, Fi
|
||||
if1.getThen() = sync.getParent*() and
|
||||
sync.getBlock() = if2.getParent*() and
|
||||
if1.getCondition() = getANullCheck(f) and
|
||||
if2.getCondition() = getANullCheck(f) and
|
||||
not f.getType() instanceof ImmutableType
|
||||
if2.getCondition() = getANullCheck(f)
|
||||
}
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -0,0 +1,13 @@
|
||||
private Object lock = new Object();
|
||||
private MyImmutableObject f = null;
|
||||
|
||||
public MyImmutableObject getMyImmutableObject() {
|
||||
if (f == null) {
|
||||
synchronized(lock) {
|
||||
if (f == null) {
|
||||
f = new MyImmutableObject();
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
}
|
||||
return f; // BAD
|
||||
}
|
||||
@@ -66,6 +66,26 @@ variable can be used to avoid reading the field more times than neccessary.
|
||||
</p>
|
||||
<sample src="DoubleCheckedLockingGood.java"/>
|
||||
|
||||
<p>
|
||||
As a final note, it is possible to use double-checked locking correctly without
|
||||
<code>volatile</code> if the object you construct is immutable (that is, the
|
||||
object declares all fields as <code>final</code>), and the double-checked field
|
||||
is read exactly once outside the synchronized block.
|
||||
</p>
|
||||
<p>
|
||||
Given that all fields in <code>MyImmutableObject</code> are declared
|
||||
<code>final</code> then the following example is protected against exposing
|
||||
uninitialized fields to another thread. However, since there are two reads of
|
||||
<code>f</code> without synchronization, it is possible that these are
|
||||
reordered, which means that this method can return <code>null</code>.
|
||||
</p>
|
||||
<sample src="DoubleCheckedLockingBad3.java"/>
|
||||
<p>
|
||||
In this case, using a local variable to minimize the number of field reads is
|
||||
no longer a performance improvement, but rather a crucial detail that is
|
||||
necessary for correctness.
|
||||
</p>
|
||||
|
||||
</example>
|
||||
|
||||
<references>
|
||||
@@ -80,6 +100,14 @@ Java Language Specification:
|
||||
<li>
|
||||
Wikipedia: <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double-checked_locking">Double-checked locking</a>.
|
||||
</li>
|
||||
<li>
|
||||
Aleksey Shipilëv:
|
||||
<a href="https://shipilev.net/blog/2014/safe-public-construction/">Safe Publication and Safe Initialization in Java</a>.
|
||||
</li>
|
||||
<li>
|
||||
Aleksey Shipilëv:
|
||||
<a href="https://shipilev.net/blog/2016/close-encounters-of-jmm-kind/">Close Encounters of The Java Memory Model Kind</a>.
|
||||
</li>
|
||||
|
||||
</references>
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user