release/20.x: [rtsan][Apple] Add interceptor for _os_nospin_lock_lock (#131034)

[llvmbot]

Backport 481a55a

Requested by: @wrotki

[llvmbot]

@cjappl What do you think about merging this PR to the release branch?

[llvmbot]

@llvm/pr-subscribers-compiler-rt-sanitizer

Author: None (llvmbot)

Changes

Backport 481a55a

Requested by: @wrotki

---

Full diff: https://github.com/llvm/llvm-project/pull/132997.diff

2 Files Affected:

• (modified) compiler-rt/lib/rtsan/rtsan_interceptors_posix.cpp (+11)
• (modified) compiler-rt/lib/rtsan/tests/rtsan_test_interceptors_posix.cpp (+19)

diff --git a/compiler-rt/lib/rtsan/rtsan_interceptors_posix.cpp b/compiler-rt/lib/rtsan/rtsan_interceptors_posix.cpp
index 6816119065263..4d602a88ba9ae 100644
--- a/compiler-rt/lib/rtsan/rtsan_interceptors_posix.cpp
+++ b/compiler-rt/lib/rtsan/rtsan_interceptors_posix.cpp
@@ -30,6 +30,12 @@
 extern "C" {
 typedef int32_t OSSpinLock;
 void OSSpinLockLock(volatile OSSpinLock *__lock);
+// A pointer to this type is in the interface for `_os_nospin_lock_lock`, but
+// it's an internal implementation detail of `os/lock.c` on Darwin, and
+// therefore not available in any headers. As a workaround, we forward declare
+// it here, which is enough to facilitate interception of _os_nospin_lock_lock.
+struct _os_nospin_lock_s;
+using _os_nospin_lock_t = _os_nospin_lock_s *;
 }
 #endif // TARGET_OS_MAC
 
@@ -642,6 +648,11 @@ INTERCEPTOR(void, os_unfair_lock_lock, os_unfair_lock_t lock) {
   __rtsan_notify_intercepted_call("os_unfair_lock_lock");
   return REAL(os_unfair_lock_lock)(lock);
 }
+
+INTERCEPTOR(void, _os_nospin_lock_lock, _os_nospin_lock_t lock) {
+  __rtsan_notify_intercepted_call("_os_nospin_lock_lock");
+  return REAL(_os_nospin_lock_lock)(lock);
+}
 #define RTSAN_MAYBE_INTERCEPT_OS_UNFAIR_LOCK_LOCK                              \
   INTERCEPT_FUNCTION(os_unfair_lock_lock)
 #else
diff --git a/compiler-rt/lib/rtsan/tests/rtsan_test_interceptors_posix.cpp b/compiler-rt/lib/rtsan/tests/rtsan_test_interceptors_posix.cpp
index 59663776366bb..75f723081c4b6 100644
--- a/compiler-rt/lib/rtsan/tests/rtsan_test_interceptors_posix.cpp
+++ b/compiler-rt/lib/rtsan/tests/rtsan_test_interceptors_posix.cpp
@@ -1058,6 +1058,25 @@ TEST(TestRtsanInterceptors, OsUnfairLockLockDiesWhenRealtime) {
   ExpectRealtimeDeath(Func, "os_unfair_lock_lock");
   ExpectNonRealtimeSurvival(Func);
 }
+
+// We intercept _os_nospin_lock_lock because it's the internal
+// locking mechanism for MacOS's atomic implementation for data
+// types that are larger than the hardware's maximum lock-free size.
+// However, it's a private implementation detail and not visible in any headers,
+// so we must duplicate the required type definitions to forward declaration
+// what we need here.
+extern "C" {
+struct _os_nospin_lock_s {
+  unsigned int oul_value;
+};
+void _os_nospin_lock_lock(_os_nospin_lock_s *);
+}
+TEST(TestRtsanInterceptors, OsNoSpinLockLockDiesWhenRealtime) {
+  _os_nospin_lock_s lock{};
+  auto Func = [&]() { _os_nospin_lock_lock(&lock); };
+  ExpectRealtimeDeath(Func, "_os_nospin_lock_lock");
+  ExpectNonRealtimeSurvival(Func);
+}
 #endif
 
 #if SANITIZER_LINUX

[github-actions]

⚠️ We detected that you are using a GitHub private e-mail address to contribute to the repo.
Please turn off Keep my email addresses private setting in your account.
See LLVM Discourse for more information.

[wrotki]

@cjappl I misunderstood @thetruestblue 's request, she asked me to cherry-pick XFAIL on the test, not your change. Apologies - I'll let you cherry-pick this yourself once you decide it's ready 🙂

[cjappl]

Sounds good! Yes, it seems like there is more to understand about the original fix before we cherry-pick it. :)

[tstellar]

Can we close this?

[wrotki]

@tstellar yes - but I thought this PR was already closed?