Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Datasets locking/v11 #12580

Closed
wants to merge 4 commits into from
Closed

Conversation

inashivb
Copy link
Member

Link to ticket: https://redmine.openinfosecfoundation.org/issues/7398

Previous PR: #12570

Changes since v10:

  • renamed fns and cleaned up code as per review
  • rebased on top of latest master

SV_BRANCH=OISF/suricata-verify#2287

In a recent warning reported by scan-build, datasets were found to be
using a blocking call in a critical section.

datasets.c:187:12: warning: Call to blocking function 'fgets' inside of critical section [unix.BlockInCriticalSection]
  187 |     while (fgets(line, (int)sizeof(line), fp) != NULL) {
      |            ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
datasets.c:292:12: warning: Call to blocking function 'fgets' inside of critical section [unix.BlockInCriticalSection]
  292 |     while (fgets(line, (int)sizeof(line), fp) != NULL) {
      |            ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
datasets.c:368:12: warning: Call to blocking function 'fgets' inside of critical section [unix.BlockInCriticalSection]
  368 |     while (fgets(line, (int)sizeof(line), fp) != NULL) {
      |            ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
datasets.c:442:12: warning: Call to blocking function 'fgets' inside of critical section [unix.BlockInCriticalSection]
  442 |     while (fgets(line, (int)sizeof(line), fp) != NULL) {
      |            ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
datasets.c:512:12: warning: Call to blocking function 'fgets' inside of critical section [unix.BlockInCriticalSection]
  512 |     while (fgets(line, (int)sizeof(line), fp) != NULL) {
      |            ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
5 warnings generated.

These calls are blocking in the multi tenant mode where several tenants
may be trying to load the same dataset in parallel.
In a single tenant mode, this operation is performed as a part of a
single thread before the engine startup.

In order to evade the warning and simplify the code, the initial file
reading is moved to Rust with this commit with a much simpler handling
of dataset and datarep.

Bug 7398
Copy link

codecov bot commented Feb 14, 2025

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 77.41935% with 49 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 80.72%. Comparing base (c6d038b) to head (e13a1f3).
Report is 9 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master   #12580      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   80.72%   80.72%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files         930      931       +1     
  Lines      259129   259115      -14     
==========================================
- Hits       209187   209167      -20     
- Misses      49942    49948       +6     
Flag Coverage Δ
fuzzcorpus 56.94% <19.81%> (+<0.01%) ⬆️
livemode 19.39% <0.00%> (+<0.01%) ⬆️
pcap 44.19% <0.46%> (+0.03%) ⬆️
suricata-verify 63.41% <79.24%> (-0.01%) ⬇️
unittests 58.34% <0.46%> (-0.01%) ⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

@suricata-qa
Copy link

Information: QA ran without warnings.

Pipeline 24726

@jasonish
Copy link
Member

Does this actually fix the blocking read in a critical section? Or we just moved it to Rust to evade the warning?

@victorjulien
Copy link
Member

Does this actually fix the blocking read in a critical section? Or we just moved it to Rust to evade the warning?

I don't think it fundamentally changes anything, but it is a nice side effect that the warning is gone. The warning wasn't very useful here I think.

@victorjulien victorjulien added this to the 8.0 milestone Feb 14, 2025
@victorjulien
Copy link
Member

Merged in #12584, thanks!

@inashivb inashivb deleted the datasets-locking/v11 branch February 17, 2025 05:44
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants