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

Fix ACE_Logging_Strategy::handle_timeout returning -1 without releasing ACE_Log_Msg lock #2259

Open
wants to merge 9 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

likema
Copy link
Contributor

@likema likema commented Jul 18, 2024

Before changed, there were two snippets in ACE_Logging_Strategy::handle_timeout :

if (output_file == 0)
        return -1;

whiich would return without releasing ACE_Log_Msg lock

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • Bug Fixes
    • Improved thread safety in logging mechanism
    • Added null-check before closing output file
    • Enhanced resource management for logging strategy
    • Streamlined file operations for clarity and reduced error-proneness
  • New Features
    • Updated member variable initializations for improved safety and clarity.

@likema likema changed the title Fix ACE_Logging_Strategy::handle_timeout returning -1 without releasing ACE_Log_Msg lock Fix ACE_Logging_Strategy::handle_timeout returning -1 without releasing ACE_Log_Msg lock Jul 18, 2024
@likema likema force-pushed the log-strategy-lock branch from 5324f14 to 9dd8a78 Compare July 19, 2024 15:25
@jwillemsen
Copy link
Member

Don’t force push, makes it harder to review, use nullptr instead of 0

@likema
Copy link
Contributor Author

likema commented Jul 19, 2024

Don’t force push, makes it harder to review, use nullptr instead of 0

OK. Shall I combine two commits into one after reviewed so that keep one issue per commit?

@jwillemsen
Copy link
Member

No need to squash, please add/extend a unit test as reproducer

Copy link

coderabbitai bot commented Jan 31, 2025

Walkthrough

The changes in the Logging_Strategy.cpp and Logging_Strategy.h files focus on enhancing code clarity and safety. Key modifications include initializing variables with empty initializers, updating pointer initializations from 0 to nullptr, and improving error handling in the handle_timeout method with ACE_GUARD_RETURN. Additionally, member variables in the header file have been assigned default initial values to prevent undefined behavior. These adjustments aim to create a more maintainable and robust logging strategy implementation.

Changes

File Change Summary
ACE/ace/Logging_Strategy.cpp - Updated priorities and tokenize methods to initialize strtokp with {}
- Changed pointer initializations from 0 to nullptr for filename_, logger_key_, and program_name_
- Replaced direct lock management with ACE_GUARD_RETURN in handle_timeout
- Added null checks before closing output files
- Set reactor to nullptr in fini method
ACE/ace/Logging_Strategy.h - Initialized member variables with default values, including thread_priority_mask_, process_priority_mask_, flags_, and others to prevent undefined behavior

Possibly related PRs

  • Reset FILE* Log_Msg::ostream_ #2258: The changes in the main PR and the retrieved PR both involve updating pointer initializations from 0 to nullptr, indicating a direct relationship in their modifications to improve code clarity and safety regarding pointer handling.

Poem

🐰 A Logging Tale of Thread-Safe Grace 🔒

In ACE's realm, a guard now stands tall,
Protecting threads from lock's risky sprawl.
Null checks dance, resources clean,
Safety woven, a coder's dream!

Hop, hop, hurrah for thread-safe might! 🚀


📜 Recent review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between cbd72dc and e1db79f.

📒 Files selected for processing (2)
  • ACE/ace/Logging_Strategy.cpp (18 hunks)
  • ACE/ace/Logging_Strategy.h (1 hunks)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)
  • ACE/ace/Logging_Strategy.cpp
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms (19)
  • GitHub Check: ubuntu-20.04 g++-10 ACE for TAO
  • GitHub Check: ubuntu-20.04 clang++-12
  • GitHub Check: ubuntu-20.04 clang++-11
  • GitHub Check: ubuntu-20.04 clang++-10
  • GitHub Check: VS2022Release64
  • GitHub Check: VS2022Debug64
  • GitHub Check: VS2022WChar
  • GitHub Check: VS2019Debug64Cxx20
  • GitHub Check: VS2019Debug64Cxx17
  • GitHub Check: VS2019Release32
  • GitHub Check: VS2019Debug32
  • GitHub Check: VS2019Release64
  • GitHub Check: VS2019Debug64
  • GitHub Check: VS2019WChar
  • GitHub Check: MINGW64-gcc
  • GitHub Check: alpine-3.18
  • GitHub Check: windows-2019 vs2019
  • GitHub Check: ubuntu-22.04 g++-12
  • GitHub Check: ubuntu-20.04 g++-10
🔇 Additional comments (4)
ACE/ace/Logging_Strategy.h (4)

164-164: LGTM: Good use of zero-initialization for pointers.

The initialization of pointer members to {} (which zero-initializes to nullptr) follows modern C++ practices and prevents undefined behavior from uninitialized pointers.

Also applies to: 167-167, 170-170


174-174: LGTM: Boolean flags properly initialized to documented defaults.

The initialization of boolean members to {} (which zero-initializes to false) matches the documented default values in the comments and prevents undefined behavior.

Also applies to: 178-178, 182-182


155-155: LGTM: Numeric values properly initialized with appropriate defaults.

The initialization of numeric members follows best practices:

  • Zero-initialization with {} for members without specific defaults
  • Explicit initialization to documented default values where applicable
  • Good use of the ACE_DEFAULT_LOGFILE_POLL_INTERVAL constant

Also applies to: 158-158, 161-161, 186-186, 191-191, 196-196, 200-200


155-200: Note: Member initializations improve safety but don't directly address the locking issue.

While these initializations are valuable improvements that prevent undefined behavior, they don't directly address the PR's main objective of fixing the lock release issue in handle_timeout. Please ensure the corresponding changes in the implementation file properly handle the lock release.

✅ Verification successful

Lock Handling in handle_timeout Verified

The handle_timeout implementation now properly uses ACE_GUARD_RETURN to acquire and automatically release the lock, addressing the issue of potentially returning -1 without releasing the lock.

  • The use of ACE_GUARD_RETURN in ACE_Logging_Strategy::handle_timeout ensures proper lock release via RAII.
  • The member initializations in the header improve safety but do not directly influence the locking mechanism.
🏁 Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Description: Look for the handle_timeout implementation to verify lock handling
ast-grep --pattern $'ACE_Logging_Strategy::handle_timeout($_, $_) {
  $$$
}'

Length of output: 248


Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Locate the implementation file for ACE_Logging_Strategy
fd -HI "Logging_Strategy.cpp" || true

# If the implementation file is found, search for the handle_timeout function definition with context.
if [ -f ACE/ace/Logging_Strategy.cpp ]; then
    echo "Searching for handle_timeout in ACE/ace/Logging_Strategy.cpp"
    rg -C 10 "handle_timeout" ACE/ace/Logging_Strategy.cpp
else
    echo "ACE/ace/Logging_Strategy.cpp not found. Searching for handle_timeout in all ACE/ace files..."
    rg -C 10 "handle_timeout" ACE/ace/
fi

Length of output: 2406


🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

  • Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
    • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
    • Generate unit testing code for this file.
    • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
  • Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
    • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
  • PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
    • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
    • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
    • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)

  • @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
  • @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
  • @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
  • @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
  • @coderabbitai generate docstrings to generate docstrings for this PR. (Beta)
  • @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
  • @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

  • Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
  • Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
  • Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

CodeRabbit Configuration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

  • You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
  • Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
  • If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

Documentation and Community

  • Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
  • Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
  • Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

Copy link

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Actionable comments posted: 0

🧹 Nitpick comments (1)
ACE/ace/Logging_Strategy.cpp (1)

445-449: Consider checking the return code from ACE_OS::fclose.
By silently ignoring potential errors, you may miss critical flush or close failures. For example, you could log an error or return a failure status:

-ACE_OS::fclose (output_file);
+if (ACE_OS::fclose (output_file) != 0)
+  {
+    ACELIB_ERROR ((LM_ERROR, ACE_TEXT ("Failed to close output file\n")));
+    return -1;
+  }
📜 Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between b5f10b5 and b15bb02.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • ACE/ace/Logging_Strategy.cpp (1 hunks)
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms (1)
  • GitHub Check: Codacy Static Code Analysis
🔇 Additional comments (1)
ACE/ace/Logging_Strategy.cpp (1)

436-437: Good use of ACE_Guard to ensure lock release.
This approach prevents the function from returning prematurely without unlocking, reducing the risk of deadlocks.

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.

2 participants