summaryrefslogtreecommitdiffhomepage
path: root/tools/checklocks/test/test.go
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
Diffstat (limited to 'tools/checklocks/test/test.go')
-rw-r--r--tools/checklocks/test/test.go362
1 files changed, 362 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/tools/checklocks/test/test.go b/tools/checklocks/test/test.go
new file mode 100644
index 000000000..05693c183
--- /dev/null
+++ b/tools/checklocks/test/test.go
@@ -0,0 +1,362 @@
+// Copyright 2020 The gVisor Authors.
+//
+// Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "License");
+// you may not use this file except in compliance with the License.
+// You may obtain a copy of the License at
+//
+// http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
+//
+// Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software
+// distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS,
+// WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied.
+// See the License for the specific language governing permissions and
+// limitations under the License.
+
+// Package test is a test package.
+package test
+
+import (
+ "math/rand"
+ "sync"
+)
+
+type oneGuarded struct {
+ mu sync.Mutex
+ // +checklocks:mu
+ guardedField int
+
+ unguardedField int
+}
+
+func testAccessOne() {
+ var tc oneGuarded
+ // Valid access
+ tc.mu.Lock()
+ tc.guardedField = 1
+ tc.unguardedField = 1
+ tc.mu.Unlock()
+
+ // Valid access as unguarded field is not protected by mu.
+ tc.unguardedField = 2
+
+ // Invalid access
+ tc.guardedField = 2 // +checklocksfail
+
+ // Invalid read of a guarded field.
+ x := tc.guardedField // +checklocksfail
+ _ = x
+}
+
+func testFunctionCallsNoParameters() {
+ // Couple of regular function calls with no parameters.
+ funcCallWithValidAccess()
+ funcCallWithInvalidAccess()
+}
+
+func funcCallWithValidAccess() {
+ var tc2 oneGuarded
+ // Valid tc2 access
+ tc2.mu.Lock()
+ tc2.guardedField = 1
+ tc2.mu.Unlock()
+}
+
+func funcCallWithInvalidAccess() {
+ var tc oneGuarded
+ var tc2 oneGuarded
+ // Invalid access, wrong mutex is held.
+ tc.mu.Lock()
+ tc2.guardedField = 2 // +checklocksfail
+ tc.mu.Unlock()
+}
+
+func testParameterPassing() {
+ var tc oneGuarded
+
+ // Valid call where a guardedField is passed to a function as a parameter.
+ tc.mu.Lock()
+ nestedWithGuardByAddr(&tc.guardedField, &tc.unguardedField)
+ tc.mu.Unlock()
+
+ // Invalid call where a guardedField is passed to a function as a parameter
+ // without holding locks.
+ nestedWithGuardByAddr(&tc.guardedField, &tc.unguardedField) // +checklocksfail
+
+ // Valid call where a guardedField is passed to a function as a parameter.
+ tc.mu.Lock()
+ nestedWithGuardByValue(tc.guardedField, tc.unguardedField)
+ tc.mu.Unlock()
+
+ // Invalid call where a guardedField is passed to a function as a parameter
+ // without holding locks.
+ nestedWithGuardByValue(tc.guardedField, tc.unguardedField) // +checklocksfail
+}
+
+func nestedWithGuardByAddr(guardedField, unguardedField *int) {
+ *guardedField = 4
+ *unguardedField = 5
+}
+
+func nestedWithGuardByValue(guardedField, unguardedField int) {
+ // read the fields to keep SA4009 static analyzer happy.
+ _ = guardedField
+ _ = unguardedField
+ guardedField = 4
+ unguardedField = 5
+}
+
+type twoGuarded struct {
+ mu sync.Mutex
+ // +checklocks:mu
+ guardedField1 int
+ // +checklocks:mu
+ guardedField2 int
+}
+
+type twoLocks struct {
+ mu sync.Mutex
+ secondMu sync.Mutex
+
+ // +checklocks:mu
+ guardedField1 int
+ // +checklocks:secondMu
+ guardedField2 int
+}
+
+type twoLocksDoubleGuard struct {
+ mu sync.Mutex
+ secondMu sync.Mutex
+
+ // +checklocks:mu
+ // +checklocks:secondMu
+ doubleGuardedField int
+}
+
+func testTwoLocksDoubleGuard() {
+ var tc twoLocksDoubleGuard
+
+ // Double guarded field
+ tc.mu.Lock()
+ tc.secondMu.Lock()
+ tc.doubleGuardedField = 1
+ tc.secondMu.Unlock()
+
+ // This should fail as we released the secondMu.
+ tc.doubleGuardedField = 2 // +checklocksfail
+ tc.mu.Unlock()
+
+ // This should fail as well as now we are not holding any locks.
+ //
+ // This line triggers two failures one for each mutex, hence the 2 after
+ // fail.
+ tc.doubleGuardedField = 3 // +checklocksfail:2
+}
+
+type rwGuarded struct {
+ rwMu sync.RWMutex
+
+ // +checklocks:rwMu
+ rwGuardedField int
+}
+
+func testRWGuarded() {
+ var tc rwGuarded
+
+ // Assignment w/ exclusive lock should pass.
+ tc.rwMu.Lock()
+ tc.rwGuardedField = 1
+ tc.rwMu.Unlock()
+
+ // Assignment w/ RWLock should pass as we don't differentiate between
+ // Lock/RLock.
+ tc.rwMu.RLock()
+ tc.rwGuardedField = 2
+ tc.rwMu.RUnlock()
+
+ // Assignment w/o hold Lock() should fail.
+ tc.rwGuardedField = 3 // +checklocksfail
+
+ // Reading w/o holding lock should fail.
+ x := tc.rwGuardedField + 3 // +checklocksfail
+ _ = x
+}
+
+type nestedFields struct {
+ mu sync.Mutex
+
+ // +checklocks:mu
+ nestedStruct struct {
+ nested1 int
+ nested2 int
+ }
+}
+
+func testNestedStructGuards() {
+ var tc nestedFields
+ // Valid access with mu held.
+ tc.mu.Lock()
+ tc.nestedStruct.nested1 = 1
+ tc.nestedStruct.nested2 = 2
+ tc.mu.Unlock()
+
+ // Invalid access to nested1 wihout holding mu.
+ tc.nestedStruct.nested1 = 1 // +checklocksfail
+}
+
+type testCaseMethods struct {
+ mu sync.Mutex
+
+ // +checklocks:mu
+ guardedField int
+}
+
+func (t *testCaseMethods) Method() {
+ // Valid access
+ t.mu.Lock()
+ t.guardedField = 1
+ t.mu.Unlock()
+
+ // invalid access
+ t.guardedField = 2 // +checklocksfail
+}
+
+// +checklocks:t.mu
+func (t *testCaseMethods) MethodLocked(a, b, c int) {
+ t.guardedField = 3
+}
+
+// +checklocksignore
+func (t *testCaseMethods) IgnoredMethod() {
+ // Invalid access but should not fail as the function is annotated
+ // with "// +checklocksignore"
+ t.guardedField = 2
+}
+
+func testMethodCalls() {
+ var tc2 testCaseMethods
+
+ // Valid use, tc2.Method acquires lock.
+ tc2.Method()
+
+ // Valid access tc2.mu is held before calling tc2.MethodLocked.
+ tc2.mu.Lock()
+ tc2.MethodLocked(1, 2, 3)
+ tc2.mu.Unlock()
+
+ // Invalid access no locks are being held.
+ tc2.MethodLocked(4, 5, 6) // +checklocksfail
+}
+
+type noMutex struct {
+ f int
+ g int
+}
+
+func (n noMutex) method() {
+ n.f = 1
+ n.f = n.g
+}
+
+func testNoMutex() {
+ var n noMutex
+ n.method()
+}
+
+func testMultiple() {
+ var tc1, tc2, tc3 testCaseMethods
+
+ tc1.mu.Lock()
+
+ // Valid access we are holding tc1's lock.
+ tc1.guardedField = 1
+
+ // Invalid access we are not holding tc2 or tc3's lock.
+ tc2.guardedField = 2 // +checklocksfail
+ tc3.guardedField = 3 // +checklocksfail
+ tc1.mu.Unlock()
+}
+
+func testConditionalBranchingLocks() {
+ var tc2 testCaseMethods
+ x := rand.Intn(10)
+ if x%2 == 1 {
+ tc2.mu.Lock()
+ }
+ // This is invalid access as tc2.mu is not held if we never entered
+ // the if block.
+ tc2.guardedField = 1 // +checklocksfail
+
+ var tc3 testCaseMethods
+ if x%2 == 1 {
+ tc3.mu.Lock()
+ } else {
+ tc3.mu.Lock()
+ }
+ // This is valid as tc3.mu is held in if and else blocks.
+ tc3.guardedField = 1
+}
+
+type testMethodWithParams struct {
+ mu sync.Mutex
+
+ // +checklocks:mu
+ guardedField int
+}
+
+type ptrToTestMethodWithParams *testMethodWithParams
+
+// +checklocks:t.mu
+// +checklocks:a.mu
+func (t *testMethodWithParams) methodLockedWithParams(a *testMethodWithParams, b *testMethodWithParams) {
+ t.guardedField = a.guardedField
+ b.guardedField = a.guardedField // +checklocksfail
+}
+
+// +checklocks:t.mu
+// +checklocks:a.mu
+// +checklocks:b.mu
+func (t *testMethodWithParams) methodLockedWithPtrType(a *testMethodWithParams, b ptrToTestMethodWithParams) {
+ t.guardedField = a.guardedField
+ b.guardedField = a.guardedField
+}
+
+// +checklocks:a.mu
+func standaloneFunctionWithGuard(a *testMethodWithParams) {
+ a.guardedField = 1
+ a.mu.Unlock()
+ a.guardedField = 1 // +checklocksfail
+}
+
+type testMethodWithEmbedded struct {
+ mu sync.Mutex
+
+ // +checklocks:mu
+ guardedField int
+ p *testMethodWithParams
+}
+
+// +checklocks:t.mu
+func (t *testMethodWithEmbedded) DoLocked() {
+ var a, b testMethodWithParams
+ t.guardedField = 1
+ a.mu.Lock()
+ b.mu.Lock()
+ t.p.methodLockedWithParams(&a, &b) // +checklocksfail
+ a.mu.Unlock()
+ b.mu.Unlock()
+}
+
+// UnsupportedLockerExample is a test that verifies that trying to annotate a
+// field that is not a sync.Mutex/RWMutex results in a failure.
+type UnsupportedLockerExample struct {
+ mu sync.Locker
+
+ // +checklocks:mu
+ x int // +checklocksfail
+}
+
+func abc() {
+ var mu sync.Mutex
+ a := UnsupportedLockerExample{mu: &mu}
+ a.x = 1
+}