Bug #14070
closedRefining a module dumps core
Description
Including and refining one module at a time, seems to cause "double free" bug. Here is a short example (ko1 found):
loop do
Class.new do
include Enumerable
end
Module.new do
refine Enumerable do
def foo
end
end
end
end
make test-spec
fails with SEGV very infrequently.
The refinement module (the return value of refine Enumerable
) seems to be included to Enumerable, and simultaneously, to have Enumerable as a superclass. Is this intended? The current VM assumes that a module has no superclass, and that a class is not included to other class. This discrepancy causes SEGV.
If this is really intended, we need to extend VM to support a module that has a superclass and is included. The following patch fixes the issue by keeping a included module list in addition to a subclass list. I'm unsure if this is enough or not.
diff --git a/class.c b/class.c
index 364f258333..a092fd7cc9 100644
--- a/class.c
+++ b/class.c
@@ -62,14 +62,14 @@ rb_module_add_to_subclasses_list(VALUE module, VALUE iclass)
entry->klass = iclass;
entry->next = NULL;
- head = RCLASS_EXT(module)->subclasses;
+ head = RCLASS_EXT(module)->submodules;
if (head) {
entry->next = head;
RCLASS_EXT(head->klass)->module_subclasses = &entry->next;
}
- RCLASS_EXT(module)->subclasses = entry;
- RCLASS_EXT(iclass)->module_subclasses = &RCLASS_EXT(module)->subclasses;
+ RCLASS_EXT(module)->submodules = entry;
+ RCLASS_EXT(iclass)->module_subclasses = &RCLASS_EXT(module)->submodules;
}
void
@@ -110,10 +110,8 @@ rb_class_remove_from_module_subclasses(VALUE klass)
}
void
-rb_class_foreach_subclass(VALUE klass, void (*f)(VALUE, VALUE), VALUE arg)
+rb_class_foreach_subclass(rb_subclass_entry_t *cur, void (*f)(VALUE, VALUE), VALUE arg)
{
- rb_subclass_entry_t *cur = RCLASS_EXT(klass)->subclasses;
-
/* do not be tempted to simplify this loop into a for loop, the order of
operations is important here if `f` modifies the linked list */
while (cur) {
@@ -132,7 +130,7 @@ class_detach_subclasses(VALUE klass, VALUE arg)
void
rb_class_detach_subclasses(VALUE klass)
{
- rb_class_foreach_subclass(klass, class_detach_subclasses, Qnil);
+ rb_class_foreach_subclass(RCLASS_EXT(klass)->subclasses, class_detach_subclasses, Qnil);
}
static void
@@ -144,7 +142,7 @@ class_detach_module_subclasses(VALUE klass, VALUE arg)
void
rb_class_detach_module_subclasses(VALUE klass)
{
- rb_class_foreach_subclass(klass, class_detach_module_subclasses, Qnil);
+ rb_class_foreach_subclass(RCLASS_EXT(klass)->submodules, class_detach_module_subclasses, Qnil);
}
/**
diff --git a/gc.c b/gc.c
index 0d6163ea98..a85375ffd7 100644
--- a/gc.c
+++ b/gc.c
@@ -2220,14 +2220,12 @@ obj_free(rb_objspace_t *objspace, VALUE obj)
if (RCLASS_IV_INDEX_TBL(obj)) {
st_free_table(RCLASS_IV_INDEX_TBL(obj));
}
+ if (RCLASS_EXT(obj)->submodules) {
+ rb_class_detach_module_subclasses(obj);
+ RCLASS_EXT(obj)->submodules = NULL;
+ }
if (RCLASS_EXT(obj)->subclasses) {
- if (BUILTIN_TYPE(obj) == T_MODULE) {
- rb_class_detach_module_subclasses(obj);
- }
- else {
- rb_class_detach_subclasses(obj);
- }
- RCLASS_EXT(obj)->subclasses = NULL;
+ rb_class_detach_subclasses(obj);
}
rb_class_remove_from_module_subclasses(obj);
rb_class_remove_from_super_subclasses(obj);
diff --git a/internal.h b/internal.h
index ad29434c7c..10b8051748 100644
--- a/internal.h
+++ b/internal.h
@@ -764,6 +764,7 @@ struct rb_classext_struct {
* in the module's `subclasses` list that indicates that the klass has been
* included. Hopefully that makes sense.
*/
+ rb_subclass_entry_t *submodules;
rb_subclass_entry_t **module_subclasses;
rb_serial_t class_serial;
const VALUE origin_;
@@ -1077,7 +1078,7 @@ VALUE rb_class_boot(VALUE);
VALUE rb_class_inherited(VALUE, VALUE);
VALUE rb_make_metaclass(VALUE, VALUE);
VALUE rb_include_class_new(VALUE, VALUE);
-void rb_class_foreach_subclass(VALUE klass, void (*f)(VALUE, VALUE), VALUE);
+void rb_class_foreach_subclass(rb_subclass_entry_t *cur, void (*f)(VALUE, VALUE), VALUE);
void rb_class_detach_subclasses(VALUE);
void rb_class_detach_module_subclasses(VALUE);
void rb_class_remove_from_module_subclasses(VALUE);
diff --git a/vm_method.c b/vm_method.c
index 3378f10bd5..817ae09fcb 100644
--- a/vm_method.c
+++ b/vm_method.c
@@ -77,7 +77,8 @@ rb_class_clear_method_cache(VALUE klass, VALUE arg)
}
}
- rb_class_foreach_subclass(klass, rb_class_clear_method_cache, arg);
+ rb_class_foreach_subclass(RCLASS_EXT(klass)->subclasses, rb_class_clear_method_cache, arg);
+ rb_class_foreach_subclass(RCLASS_EXT(klass)->submodules, rb_class_clear_method_cache, arg);
}
void
@@ -103,7 +104,14 @@ rb_clear_method_cache_by_class(VALUE klass)
}
if (klass == rb_mKernel) {
- rb_subclass_entry_t *entry = RCLASS_EXT(klass)->subclasses;
+ rb_subclass_entry_t *entry = RCLASS_EXT(klass)->submodules;
+
+ for (; entry != NULL; entry = entry->next) {
+ struct rb_id_table *table = RCLASS_CALLABLE_M_TBL(entry->klass);
+ if (table)rb_id_table_clear(table);
+ }
+
+ entry = RCLASS_EXT(klass)->subclasses;
for (; entry != NULL; entry = entry->next) {
struct rb_id_table *table = RCLASS_CALLABLE_M_TBL(entry->klass);
@@ -479,7 +487,8 @@ check_override_opt_method(VALUE klass, VALUE arg)
if (newme != me) rb_vm_check_redefinition_opt_method(me, me->owner);
}
}
- rb_class_foreach_subclass(klass, check_override_opt_method, (VALUE)mid);
+ rb_class_foreach_subclass(RCLASS_EXT(klass)->subclasses, check_override_opt_method, (VALUE)mid);
+ rb_class_foreach_subclass(RCLASS_EXT(klass)->submodules, check_override_opt_method, (VALUE)mid);
}
/*
Updated by shugo (Shugo Maeda) about 7 years ago
- Status changed from Open to Assigned
Updated by shugo (Shugo Maeda) about 7 years ago
- Assignee changed from shugo (Shugo Maeda) to matz (Yukihiro Matsumoto)
mame (Yusuke Endoh) wrote:
Including and refining one module at a time, seems to cause "double free" bug. Here is a short example (ko1 found):
loop do Class.new do include Enumerable end Module.new do refine Enumerable do def foo end end end end
make test-spec
fails with SEGV very infrequently.The refinement module (the return value of
refine Enumerable
) seems to be included to Enumerable, and simultaneously, to have Enumerable as a superclass. Is this intended? The current VM assumes that a module has no superclass, and that a class is not included to other class. This discrepancy causes SEGV.
The superclass of the refinement module is set for super in a refined method.
module M
def foo
"M#foo"
end
end
class C
include M
end
module M2
refine M do
def foo
"#{super} M@M2#foo"
end
end
end
using M2
C.new.foo
At first I didn't think it works with modules, and meant to prohibit super in a refined method of a module,
but I committed code without noticing this problem. (see #12534)
If this is really intended, we need to extend VM to support a module that has a superclass and is included. The following patch fixes the issue by keeping a included module list in addition to a subclass list. I'm unsure if this is enough or not.
Without the fix, we have to prohibit super in a refined method of modules, but it's a breaking change.
Is it acceptable, Matz?
Updated by Eregon (Benoit Daloze) about 7 years ago
Can we commit a fix for this?
I now put the spec using refine module
in quarantine until this is resolved:
https://github.com/ruby/ruby/commit/4d7b0b9112f2adf9e87ef75056f930bf7c1f3dc4#diff-d3d17e341ab819948121f31a45de9bdf
Updated by shugo (Shugo Maeda) about 7 years ago
- Status changed from Assigned to Closed
Applied in changeset trunk|r60980.
Modules should not have subclasses.
When refining a module, the module was set to the superclass of its refinement,
and a segmentation fault occurred.
The superclass of the refinement should be an iclass of the module.
[ruby-core:83617] [Bug #14070]
Updated by nagachika (Tomoyuki Chikanaga) almost 7 years ago
- Backport changed from 2.3: UNKNOWN, 2.4: UNKNOWN to 2.3: DONTNEED, 2.4: REQUIRED
You cannot refine Module on 2.3.x.
I set DONTNEED for 2.3.
Updated by nagachika (Tomoyuki Chikanaga) almost 7 years ago
- Backport changed from 2.3: DONTNEED, 2.4: REQUIRED to 2.3: DONTNEED, 2.4: DONE
ruby_2_4 r62233 merged revision(s) 60980,60984.