According to the Java Language Specification \[[JLS 05|AA. Java References#JLS 05]\], section 17.9 "Sleep and Yield":Specification, §17.3, "Sleep and Yield" [JLS 2013], Wiki Markup
It is important to note that neither
Thread.sleep
norThread.yield
have any synchronization semantics. In particular, the compiler does not have to flush writes cached in registers out to shared memory before a call toThread.sleep
orThread.yield
, nor does the compiler have to reload values cached in registers after a call toThread.sleep
orThread.yield
.
...
Code that bases its concurrency safety on thread suspension or yields to processes that
- Flush cached registers,
- Reload any values,
- Or provide any happens-before relationships when execution resumes,
is incorrect and is consequently disallowed. Programs must ensure that communication between threads has proper synchronization, happens-before, and safe publication semantics is misleading and paves the way for potential coding errors.
Noncompliant Code Example
...
(sleep()
)
This noncompliant code example declares a non-volatile {{Boolean}} flag. "The compiler is free to read the field {{this.done}} just once, and reuse the cached value in each execution of the loop. This would mean that the loop would never terminate, even if another thread changed the value of {{this.done}}." \[[JLS 05|AA. Java References#JLS 05]\].noncompliant code attempts to use the nonvolatile primitive Boolean member done
as a flag to terminate execution of a thread. A separate thread sets done
to true
by calling the shutdown()
method.
Code Block | ||
---|---|---|
| ||
final class ControlledStop implements Runnable {
private boolean done = false;
@Override public void run() {
while (!done) {
try {
Thread.sleep(1000);
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
// Reset interrupted status
Thread.currentThread().interrupt(); }
}
}
public void shutdown() {
this.done = true;
}
}
|
The compiler, in this case, is free to read the field this.done
once and to reuse the cached value in each execution of the loop. Consequently, the while
loop might never terminate, even when another thread calls the shutdown()
method to change the value of this.done
[JLS 2013]. This error could have resulted from the programmer incorrectly assuming that the call to Thread.sleep()
causes cached values to be reloaded.
Compliant Solution (Volatile Flag)
This compliant solution declares the flag field volatile
to ensure that updates to its value are made visible across multiple threads:
Code Block | ||
---|---|---|
| ||
final class ControlledStop implements Runnable {
private volatile boolean done = false;
@Override public void run() {
//...
}
// ...
}
|
The volatile keyword establishes a happens-before relationship between this thread and any other thread that sets done
.
Compliant Solution (Thread.interrupt()
)
A better solution for methods that call sleep()
is to use thread interruption, which causes the sleeping thread to wake immediately and handle the interruption.
Code Block | ||
---|---|---|
| ||
final class ControlledStop implements Runnable {
@Override public void run() {
// Record current thread, so others can interrupt it
myThread = currentThread();
while (!Thread.interrupted()) {
try {
| ||
Code Block | ||
| ||
private Boolean done; while (!this.done) { Thread.sleep(1000); } catch (InterruptedException e) { Thread.currentThread().interrupt(); |
Compliant Solution
}
}
}
public void shutdown(Thread th) {
th.interrupt();
}
}
|
Note that the interrupting thread must know which thread to interrupt; logic for tracking this relationship has been omitted from this solution.
Noncompliant Code Example (getState()
)
This noncompliant code example contains a doSomething()
method that starts a thread. The thread supports interruption by checking a flag and waits until notified. The stop()
method checks to see whether the thread is blocked on the wait; if so, it sets the flag to true and notifies the thread so that the thread can terminateThis compliant solution declares the flag volatile
to ensure that updates to it are seen immediately across multiple threads.
Code Block | ||
---|---|---|
| ||
private volatile Boolean done;
while (!this.done) {
Thread.sleep(1000);
}
|
Risk Assessment
Relying on the synchronization semantics of Thread.yield()
and Thread.sleep()
methods can cause unexpected behavior.
Rule | Severity | Likelihood | Remediation Cost | Priority | Level |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
CON44- J | low | probable | medium | P4 | L3 |
Automated Detection
TODO
Related Vulnerabilities
Search for vulnerabilities resulting from the violation of this rule on the CERT website.
References
Wiki Markup |
---|
\[[JLS 05|AA. Java References#JLS 05]\] section 17.9 "Sleep and Yield" |
| |
public class Waiter {
private Thread thread;
private boolean flag;
private final Object lock = new Object();
public void doSomething() {
thread = new Thread(new Runnable() {
@Override public void run() {
synchronized(lock) {
while (!flag) {
try {
lock.wait();
// ...
} catch (InterruptedException e) {
// Forward to handler
}
}
}
}
});
thread.start();
}
public boolean stop() {
if (thread != null) {
if (thread.getState() == Thread.State.WAITING) {
synchronized (lock) {
flag = true;
lock.notifyAll();
}
return true;
}
}
return false;
}
}
|
Unfortunately, the stop()
method incorrectly uses the Thread.getState()
method to check whether the thread is blocked and has not terminated before delivering the notification. Using the Thread.getState()
method for synchronization control, such as checking whether a thread is blocked on a wait, is inappropriate. Java Virtual Machines (JVMs) are permitted to implement blocking using spin-waiting; consequently, a thread can be blocked without entering the WAITING
or TIMED_WAITING
state [Goetz 2006]. Because the thread may never enter the WAITING
state, the stop()
method might fail to terminate the thread.
If doSomething()
and stop()
are called from different threads, the stop()
method could fail to see the initialized thread
, even though doSomething()
was called earlier, unless there is a happens-before relationship between the two calls. If the two methods are invoked by the same thread, they automatically have a happens-before relationship and consequently cannot encounter this problem.
Compliant Solution
This compliant solution removes the check for determining whether the thread is in the WAITING
state. This check is unnecessary because invoking notifyAll()
affects only threads that are blocked on an invocation of wait()
:
Code Block | ||
---|---|---|
| ||
public class Waiter {
// ...
private Thread thread;
private volatile boolean flag;
private final Object lock = new Object();
public boolean stop() {
if (thread != null) {
synchronized (lock) {
flag = true;
lock.notifyAll();
}
return true;
}
return false;
}
}
|
Applicability
Relying on the Thread
class's sleep()
, yield()
, and getState()
methods for synchronization control can cause unexpected behavior.
Bibliography
...
CON43-J. Use the correct form of the double-checked locking idiom 11. Concurrency (CON) 12. Methods (MET)