A bounded thread pool allows the programmer to specify the upper limit on the number of threads that can execute in a thread pool at a particular time. Tasks that depend on the completion of other tasks should not be executed in a bounded thread pool.
A form of deadlock called thread-starvation deadlock arises when all the threads executing in the pool are blocked on tasks that have not yet begun executing and are waiting on an internal queue. Thread-starvation deadlock occurs when currently executing tasks submit other tasks to a thread pool and wait for them to complete, but the thread pool does not have the capacity to accommodate all the tasks at once.
This problem is deceptive because the program could appear to function correctly when fewer threads are needed. In some cases, the issue can be mitigated by choosing a larger pool size; however, there is often no easy way to determine a suitable size.
Similarly, threads in a thread pool may not be recycled if two executing tasks require each other to complete before they can terminate. A blocking operation within a subtask can also lead to unbounded, queue growth [[Goetz 2006]].
Noncompliant Code Example (Interdependent Sub-Tasks)
This noncompliant code example is vulnerable to thread-starvation deadlock. It consists of the ValidationService
class, which performs various input validation tasks such as checking whether a user-supplied field exists in a back-end database.
The fieldAggregator()
method accepts a variable number of String
arguments and creates a task corresponding to each argument to parallelize processing. The task performs input validation using the ValidateInput
class.
In turn, the ValidateInput
class attempts to sanitize the input by creating a sub-task for each request using the SanitizeInput
class. All tasks are executed in the same thread pool. The fieldAggregator()
method blocks until all the tasks have finished executing and, when all results are available, returns the aggregated results as a StringBuilder
object to the caller.
public final class ValidationService { private final ExecutorService pool; public ValidationService(int poolSize) { pool = Executors.newFixedThreadPool(poolSize); } public void shutdown() { pool.shutdown(); } public StringBuilder fieldAggregator(String... inputs) throws InterruptedException, ExecutionException { StringBuilder sb = new StringBuilder(); Future<String>[] results = new Future[inputs.length]; // Stores the results for (int i = 0; i < inputs.length; i++) { // Submits the tasks to thread pool results[i] = pool.submit(new ValidateInput<String>(inputs[i], pool)); } for (int i = 0; i < inputs.length; i++) { // Aggregates the results sb.append(results[i].get()); } return sb; } } public final class ValidateInput<V> implements Callable<V> { private final V input; private final ExecutorService pool; ValidateInput(V input, ExecutorService pool) { this.input = input; this.pool = pool; } @Override public V call() throws Exception { // If validation fails, throw an exception here Future<V> future = pool.submit(new SanitizeInput<V>(input)); // Subtask return (V)future.get(); } } public final class SanitizeInput<V> implements Callable<V> { private final V input; SanitizeInput(V input) { this.input = input; } @Override public V call() throws Exception { // Sanitize input and return return (V)input; } }
// Hidden main() method
public static void main(String[] args) throws InterruptedException, ExecutionException {
ValidationService vs = new ValidationService(6);
System.out.println(vs.fieldAggregator("field1", "field2", "field3", "field4", "field5", "field6"));
vs.shutdown();
}
Assuming that the pool size is set to six, the ValidationService.fieldAggregator()
method is invoked to validate six arguments and submit six tasks to the thread pool. Each task submits corresponding sub-tasks to sanitize the input. The SanitizeInput
sub-tasks must execute before these threads can return their results. However, this is impossible because all six threads in the thread pool are blocked. Furthermore, the shutdown()
method cannot shut down the thread pool when it contains active tasks.
Thread-starvation deadlock can also occur when a single threaded Executor
is used, for example, when the caller creates several sub-tasks and waits for the results.
Compliant Solution (No Interdependent Tasks)
This compliant solution modifies the ValidateInput<V>
class so that the SanitizeInput
tasks are executed in the same threads as the ValidateInput
tasks and not in separate threads. Consequently, the ValidateInput
and SanitizeInput
tasks are independent and do not need to wait for each other to complete. The SanitizeInput
class has also been modified to not implement the Callable
interface.
public final class ValidationService { // ... public StringBuilder fieldAggregator(String... inputs) throws InterruptedException, ExecutionException { // ... for (int i = 0; i < inputs.length; i++) { // Don't pass-in thread pool results[i] = pool.submit(new ValidateInput<String>(inputs[i])); } // ... } } // Does not use same thread pool public final class ValidateInput<V> implements Callable<V> { private final V input; ValidateInput(V input) { this.input = input; } @Override public V call() throws Exception { // If validation fails, throw an exception here return (V) new SanitizeInput().sanitize(input); } } public final class SanitizeInput<V> { // No longer a Callable task public SanitizeInput() {} public V sanitize(V input) { // Sanitize input and return return input; } }
Thread-starvation issues can be mitigated by choosing a large thread pool size. However, an untrusted caller can still overwhelm the system by supplying more inputs. (See rule TPS00-J. Use thread pools to enable graceful degradation of service during traffic bursts.)
Note that operations that have further constraints, such as the total number of database connections or total ResultSet
objects open at a particular time, impose an upper bound on the thread pool size as each thread continues to block until the resource becomes available.
Private static ThreadLocal
variables may be used to maintain local state in each thread. When using thread pools, the lifetime of ThreadLocal
variables should be bounded by the corresponding task [[Goetz 2006]]. Furthermore, these variables should not be used to communicate between tasks. There are additional constraints in the use of ThreadLocal
variables in thread pools. (See rule TPS04-J. Ensure ThreadLocal variables are reinitialized when using thread pools.)
Noncompliant Code Example (Sub-Tasks)
Compliant Solution (Unbounded Thread Pool)
This compliant solution uses a cached thread pool, which dynamically creates new threads as needed and prevents deadlock. However, this implementation can result in resource exhaustion and should not be used in front-end or critical production systems.
public final class ValidationService { private final ExecutorService pool; public ValidationService(int poolSize) { pool = Executors.newCachedThreadPool(); } // ... }
According to the Java API [[API 2006]], the Executors.newCachedThreadPool()
method
Creates a thread pool that creates new threads as needed, but will reuse previously constructed threads when they are available. These pools will typically improve the performance of programs that execute many short-lived asynchronous tasks. Calls to execute will reuse previously constructed threads if available. If no existing thread is available, a new thread will be created and added to the pool. Threads that have not been used for sixty seconds are terminated and removed from the cache. Thus, a pool that remains idle for long enough will not consume any resources.
This noncompliant code example contains a series of sub-tasks that execute in a shared thread pool [[Gafter 2006]]. The BrowserManager
class calls perUser()
, which starts tasks that invoke perProfile()
. The perProfile()
method starts tasks that invoke perTab()
and, in turn, perTab
starts tasks that invoke doSomething()
. BrowserManager
then waits for the tasks to finish. The threads are allowed to invoke doSomething()
in any order, provided count
correctly records the number of methods executed.
public final class BrowserManager { private final ExecutorService pool = Executors.newFixedThreadPool(10); private final int numberOfTimes; private static AtomicInteger count = new AtomicInteger(); // count = 0 public BrowserManager(int n) { numberOfTimes = n; } public void perUser() { methodInvoker(numberOfTimes, "perProfile"); pool.shutdown(); } public void perProfile() { methodInvoker(numberOfTimes, "perTab"); } public void perTab() { methodInvoker(numberOfTimes, "doSomething"); } public void doSomething() { System.out.println(count.getAndIncrement()); } public void methodInvoker(int n, final String method) { final BrowserManager manager = this; Callable<Object> callable = new Callable<Object>() { @Override public Object call() throws Exception { Method meth = manager.getClass().getMethod(method); return meth.invoke(manager); } }; Collection<Callable<Object>> collection = Collections.nCopies(n, callable); try { Collection<Future<Object>> futures = pool.invokeAll(collection); } catch (InterruptedException e) { // Forward to handler Thread.currentThread().interrupt(); // Reset interrupted status } // ... } public static void main(String[] args) { BrowserManager manager = new BrowserManager(5); manager.perUser(); } }
Unfortunately, this program is susceptible to a thread-starvation deadlock. For example, if each of the five perUser
tasks spawns five perProfile
tasks, where each spawns a perTab
task, the thread pool will be exhausted, and perTab()
will not be able to allocate any additional threads to invoke the doSomething()
method.
Compliant Solution (CallerRunsPolicy
)
To prevent thread starvation, every level (worker) must have a double-ended queue, where all sub-tasks are queued [[Goetz 2006]]. Each level removes the most recently generated sub-task from the queue so that it can process it. When there are no more threads left to process, the current level runs the least-recently created sub-task of another level by picking and removing it from that level's queue (work stealing).
This compliant solution selects and schedules tasks for execution, avoiding thread-starvation deadlock. It sets the CallerRunsPolicy
on a ThreadPoolExecutor
and uses a SynchronousQueue
[[Gafter 2006]]. The policy dictates that if the thread pool runs out of available threads, any subsequent tasks will run in the thread that submitted the tasks.
public final class BrowserManager { private final static ThreadPoolExecutor pool = new ThreadPoolExecutor(0, 10, 60L, TimeUnit.SECONDS, new SynchronousQueue<Runnable>()); private final int numberOfTimes; private static AtomicInteger count = new AtomicInteger(); // count = 0 static { pool.setRejectedExecutionHandler( new ThreadPoolExecutor.CallerRunsPolicy()); } // ... }
According to Goetz and colleagues [[Goetz 2006]]
A
SynchronousQueue
is not really a queue at all, but a mechanism for managing handoffs between threads. In order to put an element on theSynchronousQueue
, another thread must already be waiting to accept the handoff. If no thread is waiting, but the current pool size is less than the maximum,ThreadPoolExecutor
creates a new thread; otherwise, the task is rejected according to the saturation policy.
According to the Java API [[API 2006]], the CallerRunsPolicy
class is
A handler for rejected tasks that runs the rejected task directly in the calling thread of the
execute
method, unless the executor has been shut down, in which case, the task is discarded.
In this compliant solution, tasks that have other tasks waiting to accept the hand-off are added to the SynchronousQueue
when the thread pool is full. For example, tasks corresponding to perTab()
are added to the SynchronousQueue
because the tasks corresponding to perProfile()
are waiting to receive the hand-off. Once the pool is full, additional tasks are rejected according to the saturation policy in effect. Because the CallerRunsPolicy
is used to handle these rejected tasks, all the rejected tasks are executed in the main thread that started the initial tasks. When all the threads corresponding to perTab()
have finished executing, the next set of tasks corresponding to perProfile()
are added to the SynchronousQueue
because the hand-off is subsequently used by perUser()
tasks.
The CallerRunsPolicy
allows graceful degradation of service when faced with many requests by distributing the workload from the thread pool to the work queue. Because the submitted tasks do not block for any reason other than waiting for other tasks to complete, the policy guarantees that the current thread can handle multiple tasks sequentially. The policy would not prevent thread-starvation deadlock if the tasks were to block for some other reason, such as network I/O. Furthermore, because SynchronousQueue
does not store tasks indefinitely for future execution, there is no unbounded queue growth, and all tasks are handled by the current thread or by a thread in the thread pool.
This compliant solution is subject to the vagaries of the thread scheduler, which might not optimally schedule the tasks. However, it avoids thread-starvation deadlock.
Risk Assessment
Executing interdependent tasks in a thread pool can lead to denial of service.
Rule |
Severity |
Likelihood |
Remediation Cost |
Priority |
Level |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
TPS01-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.
Bibliography
[[API 2006]] |
|
[[Gafter 2006]] |
|
[[Goetz 2006]] |
8.3.2 "Managing queued tasks", 8.3.3 "Saturation Policies", 5.3.3 Deques and work stealing |
null [!The CERT Oracle Secure Coding Standard for Java^button_arrow_up.png!] null