root / lib / locking.py @ aaae9bc0
History | View | Annotate | Download (17.8 kB)
1 |
#
|
---|---|
2 |
#
|
3 |
|
4 |
# Copyright (C) 2006, 2007 Google Inc.
|
5 |
#
|
6 |
# This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify
|
7 |
# it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by
|
8 |
# the Free Software Foundation; either version 2 of the License, or
|
9 |
# (at your option) any later version.
|
10 |
#
|
11 |
# This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful, but
|
12 |
# WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
|
13 |
# MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. See the GNU
|
14 |
# General Public License for more details.
|
15 |
#
|
16 |
# You should have received a copy of the GNU General Public License
|
17 |
# along with this program; if not, write to the Free Software
|
18 |
# Foundation, Inc., 51 Franklin Street, Fifth Floor, Boston, MA
|
19 |
# 02110-1301, USA.
|
20 |
|
21 |
"""Module implementing the Ganeti locking code."""
|
22 |
|
23 |
# pylint: disable-msg=W0613,W0201
|
24 |
|
25 |
import threading |
26 |
# Wouldn't it be better to define LockingError in the locking module?
|
27 |
# Well, for now that's how the rest of the code does it...
|
28 |
from ganeti import errors |
29 |
|
30 |
|
31 |
class SharedLock: |
32 |
"""Implements a shared lock.
|
33 |
|
34 |
Multiple threads can acquire the lock in a shared way, calling
|
35 |
acquire_shared(). In order to acquire the lock in an exclusive way threads
|
36 |
can call acquire_exclusive().
|
37 |
|
38 |
The lock prevents starvation but does not guarantee that threads will acquire
|
39 |
the shared lock in the order they queued for it, just that they will
|
40 |
eventually do so.
|
41 |
|
42 |
"""
|
43 |
def __init__(self): |
44 |
"""Construct a new SharedLock"""
|
45 |
# we have two conditions, c_shr and c_exc, sharing the same lock.
|
46 |
self.__lock = threading.Lock()
|
47 |
self.__turn_shr = threading.Condition(self.__lock) |
48 |
self.__turn_exc = threading.Condition(self.__lock) |
49 |
|
50 |
# current lock holders
|
51 |
self.__shr = set() |
52 |
self.__exc = None |
53 |
|
54 |
# lock waiters
|
55 |
self.__nwait_exc = 0 |
56 |
self.__nwait_shr = 0 |
57 |
|
58 |
# is this lock in the deleted state?
|
59 |
self.__deleted = False |
60 |
|
61 |
def __is_sharer(self): |
62 |
"""Is the current thread sharing the lock at this time?"""
|
63 |
return threading.currentThread() in self.__shr |
64 |
|
65 |
def __is_exclusive(self): |
66 |
"""Is the current thread holding the lock exclusively at this time?"""
|
67 |
return threading.currentThread() == self.__exc |
68 |
|
69 |
def __is_owned(self, shared=-1): |
70 |
"""Is the current thread somehow owning the lock at this time?
|
71 |
|
72 |
This is a private version of the function, which presumes you're holding
|
73 |
the internal lock.
|
74 |
|
75 |
"""
|
76 |
if shared < 0: |
77 |
return self.__is_sharer() or self.__is_exclusive() |
78 |
elif shared:
|
79 |
return self.__is_sharer() |
80 |
else:
|
81 |
return self.__is_exclusive() |
82 |
|
83 |
def _is_owned(self, shared=-1): |
84 |
"""Is the current thread somehow owning the lock at this time?
|
85 |
|
86 |
Args:
|
87 |
shared:
|
88 |
< 0: check for any type of ownership (default)
|
89 |
0: check for exclusive ownership
|
90 |
> 0: check for shared ownership
|
91 |
|
92 |
"""
|
93 |
self.__lock.acquire()
|
94 |
try:
|
95 |
result = self.__is_owned(shared)
|
96 |
finally:
|
97 |
self.__lock.release()
|
98 |
|
99 |
return result
|
100 |
|
101 |
def __wait(self,c): |
102 |
"""Wait on the given condition, and raise an exception if the current lock
|
103 |
is declared deleted in the meantime.
|
104 |
|
105 |
Args:
|
106 |
c: condition to wait on
|
107 |
|
108 |
"""
|
109 |
c.wait() |
110 |
if self.__deleted: |
111 |
raise errors.LockError('deleted lock') |
112 |
|
113 |
def __exclusive_acquire(self): |
114 |
"""Acquire the lock exclusively.
|
115 |
|
116 |
This is a private function that presumes you are already holding the
|
117 |
internal lock. It's defined separately to avoid code duplication between
|
118 |
acquire() and delete()
|
119 |
|
120 |
"""
|
121 |
self.__nwait_exc += 1 |
122 |
try:
|
123 |
# This is to save ourselves from a nasty race condition that could
|
124 |
# theoretically make the sharers starve.
|
125 |
if self.__nwait_shr > 0 or self.__nwait_exc > 1: |
126 |
self.__wait(self.__turn_exc) |
127 |
|
128 |
while len(self.__shr) > 0 or self.__exc is not None: |
129 |
self.__wait(self.__turn_exc) |
130 |
|
131 |
self.__exc = threading.currentThread()
|
132 |
finally:
|
133 |
self.__nwait_exc -= 1 |
134 |
|
135 |
|
136 |
def acquire(self, blocking=1, shared=0): |
137 |
"""Acquire a shared lock.
|
138 |
|
139 |
Args:
|
140 |
shared: whether to acquire in shared mode. By default an exclusive lock
|
141 |
will be acquired.
|
142 |
blocking: whether to block while trying to acquire or to operate in try-lock mode.
|
143 |
this locking mode is not supported yet.
|
144 |
|
145 |
"""
|
146 |
if not blocking: |
147 |
# We don't have non-blocking mode for now
|
148 |
raise NotImplementedError |
149 |
|
150 |
self.__lock.acquire()
|
151 |
try:
|
152 |
if self.__deleted: |
153 |
raise errors.LockError('deleted lock') |
154 |
|
155 |
# We cannot acquire the lock if we already have it
|
156 |
assert not self.__is_owned(), "double acquire() on a non-recursive lock" |
157 |
|
158 |
if shared:
|
159 |
self.__nwait_shr += 1 |
160 |
try:
|
161 |
# If there is an exclusive holder waiting we have to wait. We'll
|
162 |
# only do this once, though, when we start waiting for the lock. Then
|
163 |
# we'll just wait while there are no exclusive holders.
|
164 |
if self.__nwait_exc > 0: |
165 |
# TODO: if !blocking...
|
166 |
self.__wait(self.__turn_shr) |
167 |
|
168 |
while self.__exc is not None: |
169 |
# TODO: if !blocking...
|
170 |
self.__wait(self.__turn_shr) |
171 |
|
172 |
self.__shr.add(threading.currentThread())
|
173 |
finally:
|
174 |
self.__nwait_shr -= 1 |
175 |
|
176 |
else:
|
177 |
# TODO: if !blocking...
|
178 |
# (or modify __exclusive_acquire for non-blocking mode)
|
179 |
self.__exclusive_acquire()
|
180 |
|
181 |
finally:
|
182 |
self.__lock.release()
|
183 |
|
184 |
return True |
185 |
|
186 |
def release(self): |
187 |
"""Release a Shared Lock.
|
188 |
|
189 |
You must have acquired the lock, either in shared or in exclusive mode,
|
190 |
before calling this function.
|
191 |
|
192 |
"""
|
193 |
self.__lock.acquire()
|
194 |
try:
|
195 |
# Autodetect release type
|
196 |
if self.__is_exclusive(): |
197 |
self.__exc = None |
198 |
|
199 |
# An exclusive holder has just had the lock, time to put it in shared
|
200 |
# mode if there are shared holders waiting. Otherwise wake up the next
|
201 |
# exclusive holder.
|
202 |
if self.__nwait_shr > 0: |
203 |
self.__turn_shr.notifyAll()
|
204 |
elif self.__nwait_exc > 0: |
205 |
self.__turn_exc.notify()
|
206 |
|
207 |
elif self.__is_sharer(): |
208 |
self.__shr.remove(threading.currentThread())
|
209 |
|
210 |
# If there are shared holders waiting there *must* be an exclusive holder
|
211 |
# waiting as well; otherwise what were they waiting for?
|
212 |
assert (self.__nwait_shr == 0 or self.__nwait_exc > 0, |
213 |
"Lock sharers waiting while no exclusive is queueing")
|
214 |
|
215 |
# If there are no more shared holders and some exclusive holders are
|
216 |
# waiting let's wake one up.
|
217 |
if len(self.__shr) == 0 and self.__nwait_exc > 0: |
218 |
self.__turn_exc.notify()
|
219 |
|
220 |
else:
|
221 |
assert False, "Cannot release non-owned lock" |
222 |
|
223 |
finally:
|
224 |
self.__lock.release()
|
225 |
|
226 |
def delete(self, blocking=1): |
227 |
"""Delete a Shared Lock.
|
228 |
|
229 |
This operation will declare the lock for removal. First the lock will be
|
230 |
acquired in exclusive mode if you don't already own it, then the lock
|
231 |
will be put in a state where any future and pending acquire() fail.
|
232 |
|
233 |
Args:
|
234 |
blocking: whether to block while trying to acquire or to operate in
|
235 |
try-lock mode. this locking mode is not supported yet unless
|
236 |
you are already holding exclusively the lock.
|
237 |
|
238 |
"""
|
239 |
self.__lock.acquire()
|
240 |
try:
|
241 |
assert not self.__is_sharer(), "cannot delete() a lock while sharing it" |
242 |
|
243 |
if self.__deleted: |
244 |
raise errors.LockError('deleted lock') |
245 |
|
246 |
if not self.__is_exclusive(): |
247 |
if not blocking: |
248 |
# We don't have non-blocking mode for now
|
249 |
raise NotImplementedError |
250 |
self.__exclusive_acquire()
|
251 |
|
252 |
self.__deleted = True |
253 |
self.__exc = None |
254 |
# Wake up everybody, they will fail acquiring the lock and
|
255 |
# raise an exception instead.
|
256 |
self.__turn_exc.notifyAll()
|
257 |
self.__turn_shr.notifyAll()
|
258 |
|
259 |
finally:
|
260 |
self.__lock.release()
|
261 |
|
262 |
|
263 |
class LockSet: |
264 |
"""Implements a set of locks.
|
265 |
|
266 |
This abstraction implements a set of shared locks for the same resource type,
|
267 |
distinguished by name. The user can lock a subset of the resources and the
|
268 |
LockSet will take care of acquiring the locks always in the same order, thus
|
269 |
preventing deadlock.
|
270 |
|
271 |
All the locks needed in the same set must be acquired together, though.
|
272 |
|
273 |
"""
|
274 |
def __init__(self, members=None): |
275 |
"""Constructs a new LockSet.
|
276 |
|
277 |
Args:
|
278 |
members: initial members of the set
|
279 |
|
280 |
"""
|
281 |
# Used internally to guarantee coherency.
|
282 |
self.__lock = SharedLock()
|
283 |
|
284 |
# The lockdict indexes the relationship name -> lock
|
285 |
# The order-of-locking is implied by the alphabetical order of names
|
286 |
self.__lockdict = {}
|
287 |
|
288 |
if members is not None: |
289 |
for name in members: |
290 |
self.__lockdict[name] = SharedLock()
|
291 |
|
292 |
# The owner dict contains the set of locks each thread owns. For
|
293 |
# performance each thread can access its own key without a global lock on
|
294 |
# this structure. It is paramount though that *no* other type of access is
|
295 |
# done to this structure (eg. no looping over its keys). *_owner helper
|
296 |
# function are defined to guarantee access is correct, but in general never
|
297 |
# do anything different than __owners[threading.currentThread()], or there
|
298 |
# will be trouble.
|
299 |
self.__owners = {}
|
300 |
|
301 |
def _is_owned(self): |
302 |
"""Is the current thread a current level owner?"""
|
303 |
return threading.currentThread() in self.__owners |
304 |
|
305 |
def _add_owned(self, name): |
306 |
"""Note the current thread owns the given lock"""
|
307 |
if self._is_owned(): |
308 |
self.__owners[threading.currentThread()].add(name)
|
309 |
else:
|
310 |
self.__owners[threading.currentThread()] = set([name]) |
311 |
|
312 |
def _del_owned(self, name): |
313 |
"""Note the current thread owns the given lock"""
|
314 |
self.__owners[threading.currentThread()].remove(name)
|
315 |
|
316 |
if not self.__owners[threading.currentThread()]: |
317 |
del self.__owners[threading.currentThread()] |
318 |
|
319 |
def _list_owned(self): |
320 |
"""Get the set of resource names owned by the current thread"""
|
321 |
if self._is_owned(): |
322 |
return self.__owners[threading.currentThread()].copy() |
323 |
else:
|
324 |
return set() |
325 |
|
326 |
def __names(self): |
327 |
"""Return the current set of names.
|
328 |
|
329 |
Only call this function while holding __lock and don't iterate on the
|
330 |
result after releasing the lock.
|
331 |
|
332 |
"""
|
333 |
return set(self.__lockdict.keys()) |
334 |
|
335 |
def _names(self): |
336 |
"""Return a copy of the current set of elements.
|
337 |
|
338 |
Used only for debugging purposes.
|
339 |
"""
|
340 |
self.__lock.acquire(shared=1) |
341 |
try:
|
342 |
result = self.__names()
|
343 |
finally:
|
344 |
self.__lock.release()
|
345 |
return result
|
346 |
|
347 |
def acquire(self, names, blocking=1, shared=0): |
348 |
"""Acquire a set of resource locks.
|
349 |
|
350 |
Args:
|
351 |
names: the names of the locks which shall be acquired.
|
352 |
(special lock names, or instance/node names)
|
353 |
shared: whether to acquire in shared mode. By default an exclusive lock
|
354 |
will be acquired.
|
355 |
blocking: whether to block while trying to acquire or to operate in try-lock mode.
|
356 |
this locking mode is not supported yet.
|
357 |
|
358 |
Returns:
|
359 |
True: when all the locks are successfully acquired
|
360 |
|
361 |
Raises:
|
362 |
errors.LockError: when any lock we try to acquire has been deleted
|
363 |
before we succeed. In this case none of the locks requested will be
|
364 |
acquired.
|
365 |
|
366 |
"""
|
367 |
if not blocking: |
368 |
# We don't have non-blocking mode for now
|
369 |
raise NotImplementedError |
370 |
|
371 |
# Check we don't already own locks at this level
|
372 |
assert not self._is_owned(), "Cannot acquire locks in the same set twice" |
373 |
|
374 |
# Support passing in a single resource to acquire rather than many
|
375 |
if isinstance(names, basestring): |
376 |
names = [names] |
377 |
else:
|
378 |
names.sort() |
379 |
|
380 |
# Now names contains a sorted list of resources whose lock we want to
|
381 |
# acquire. In order to get them we loop on this (private) list and look
|
382 |
# them up in __lockdict. Since we have no lock held on lockdict we have no
|
383 |
# guarantees on their presence, and they may even disappear after we looked
|
384 |
# them up. This is fine though as .acquire() itself is safe and will alert
|
385 |
# us if the lock gets deleted.
|
386 |
|
387 |
try:
|
388 |
for lname in names: |
389 |
lock = self.__lockdict[lname] # raises KeyError if the lock is not there |
390 |
lock.acquire(shared=shared) # raises LockError if the lock is deleted
|
391 |
try:
|
392 |
# now the lock cannot be deleted, we have it!
|
393 |
self._add_owned(lname)
|
394 |
except:
|
395 |
# We shouldn't have problems adding the lock to the owners list, but
|
396 |
# if we did we'll try to release this lock and re-raise exception.
|
397 |
# Of course something is going to be really wrong, after this.
|
398 |
lock.release() |
399 |
raise
|
400 |
|
401 |
except (KeyError, errors.LockError): |
402 |
name_fail = lname |
403 |
for lname in self._list_owned(): |
404 |
self.__lockdict[lname].release()
|
405 |
self._del_owned(lname)
|
406 |
raise errors.LockError('non-existing lock in set (%s)' % name_fail) |
407 |
|
408 |
return True |
409 |
|
410 |
def release(self, names=None): |
411 |
"""Release a set of resource locks, at the same level.
|
412 |
|
413 |
You must have acquired the locks, either in shared or in exclusive mode,
|
414 |
before releasing them.
|
415 |
|
416 |
Args:
|
417 |
names: the names of the locks which shall be released.
|
418 |
(defaults to all the locks acquired at that level).
|
419 |
|
420 |
"""
|
421 |
|
422 |
assert self._is_owned(), "release() on lock set while not owner" |
423 |
|
424 |
# Support passing in a single resource to release rather than many
|
425 |
if isinstance(names, basestring): |
426 |
names = [names] |
427 |
|
428 |
if names is None: |
429 |
names = self._list_owned()
|
430 |
else:
|
431 |
names = set(names)
|
432 |
assert self._list_owned().issuperset(names), ( |
433 |
"release() on unheld resources %s" %
|
434 |
names.difference(self._list_owned()))
|
435 |
|
436 |
for lockname in names: |
437 |
# If we are sure the lock doesn't leave __lockdict without being
|
438 |
# exclusively held we can do this...
|
439 |
self.__lockdict[lockname].release()
|
440 |
self._del_owned(lockname)
|
441 |
|
442 |
def add(self, names, acquired=0, shared=0): |
443 |
"""Add a new set of elements to the set
|
444 |
|
445 |
Args:
|
446 |
names: names of the new elements to add
|
447 |
acquired: pre-acquire the new resource?
|
448 |
shared: is the pre-acquisition shared?
|
449 |
|
450 |
"""
|
451 |
# Support passing in a single resource to add rather than many
|
452 |
if isinstance(names, basestring): |
453 |
names = [names] |
454 |
|
455 |
# Acquire the internal lock in an exclusive way, so there cannot be a
|
456 |
# conflicting add()
|
457 |
self.__lock.acquire()
|
458 |
try:
|
459 |
invalid_names = self.__names().intersection(names)
|
460 |
if invalid_names:
|
461 |
# This must be an explicit raise, not an assert, because assert is
|
462 |
# turned off when using optimization, and this can happen because of
|
463 |
# concurrency even if the user doesn't want it.
|
464 |
raise errors.LockError("duplicate add() (%s)" % invalid_names) |
465 |
|
466 |
for lockname in names: |
467 |
lock = SharedLock() |
468 |
|
469 |
if acquired:
|
470 |
lock.acquire(shared=shared) |
471 |
# now the lock cannot be deleted, we have it!
|
472 |
try:
|
473 |
self._add_owned(lockname)
|
474 |
except:
|
475 |
# We shouldn't have problems adding the lock to the owners list,
|
476 |
# but if we did we'll try to release this lock and re-raise
|
477 |
# exception. Of course something is going to be really wrong,
|
478 |
# after this. On the other hand the lock hasn't been added to the
|
479 |
# __lockdict yet so no other threads should be pending on it. This
|
480 |
# release is just a safety measure.
|
481 |
lock.release() |
482 |
raise
|
483 |
|
484 |
self.__lockdict[lockname] = lock
|
485 |
|
486 |
finally:
|
487 |
self.__lock.release()
|
488 |
|
489 |
return True |
490 |
|
491 |
def remove(self, names, blocking=1): |
492 |
"""Remove elements from the lock set.
|
493 |
|
494 |
You can either not hold anything in the lockset or already hold a superset
|
495 |
of the elements you want to delete, exclusively.
|
496 |
|
497 |
Args:
|
498 |
names: names of the resource to remove.
|
499 |
blocking: whether to block while trying to acquire or to operate in
|
500 |
try-lock mode. this locking mode is not supported yet unless
|
501 |
you are already holding exclusively the locks.
|
502 |
|
503 |
Returns:
|
504 |
A list of lock which we failed to delete. The list is always empty if we
|
505 |
were holding all the locks exclusively.
|
506 |
|
507 |
"""
|
508 |
if not blocking and not self._is_owned(): |
509 |
# We don't have non-blocking mode for now
|
510 |
raise NotImplementedError |
511 |
|
512 |
# Support passing in a single resource to remove rather than many
|
513 |
if isinstance(names, basestring): |
514 |
names = [names] |
515 |
|
516 |
# If we own any subset of this lock it must be a superset of what we want
|
517 |
# to delete. The ownership must also be exclusive, but that will be checked
|
518 |
# by the lock itself.
|
519 |
assert not self._is_owned() or self._list_owned().issuperset(names), ( |
520 |
"remove() on acquired lockset while not owning all elements")
|
521 |
|
522 |
delete_failed=[] |
523 |
|
524 |
for lname in names: |
525 |
# Calling delete() acquires the lock exclusively if we don't already own
|
526 |
# it, and causes all pending and subsequent lock acquires to fail. It's
|
527 |
# fine to call it out of order because delete() also implies release(),
|
528 |
# and the assertion above guarantees that if we either already hold
|
529 |
# everything we want to delete, or we hold none.
|
530 |
try:
|
531 |
self.__lockdict[lname].delete()
|
532 |
except (KeyError, errors.LockError): |
533 |
delete_failed.append(lname) |
534 |
# This cannot happen if we were already holding it, verify:
|
535 |
assert not self._is_owned(), "remove failed while holding lockset" |
536 |
else:
|
537 |
# If no LockError was raised we are the ones who deleted the lock.
|
538 |
# This means we can safely remove it from lockdict, as any further or
|
539 |
# pending delete() or acquire() will fail (and nobody can have the lock
|
540 |
# since before our call to delete()).
|
541 |
#
|
542 |
# This is done in an else clause because if the exception was thrown
|
543 |
# it's the job of the one who actually deleted it.
|
544 |
del self.__lockdict[lname] |
545 |
# And let's remove it from our private list if we owned it.
|
546 |
if self._is_owned(): |
547 |
self._del_owned(lname)
|
548 |
|
549 |
return delete_failed
|
550 |
|