Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

release-23.2: sql/license: Fix data race in license/enforcer.go #130094

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Sep 5, 2024

Conversation

blathers-crl[bot]
Copy link

@blathers-crl blathers-crl bot commented Sep 4, 2024

Backport 1/1 commits from #130036 on behalf of @spilchen.

/cc @cockroachdb/release


There is a data race in TestQueryCache related to license/enforcer.go. This test is unique because it runs parallel tests that start a mock server, going through the SQL startup code. Since the license enforcer is a singleton, each parallel goroutine shares the same enforcer object. This commit addresses two issues:

  1. The Enforcer.db variable can be set twice and is otherwise unprotected. Since the db is only needed during setup, I’ve removed the variable from the struct for now. I may need to reintroduce it later, but I’ll ensure it doesn’t break this test when I do.

  2. The creation of the singleton in GetEnforcerInstance can cause a data race on the instance variable. While there is a once.Do call to generate the singleton, there was an unnecessary instance == nil check before it. I’ve removed this check to prevent the data race.

Epic: CRDB-39988
Closes: #130034
Release note: None


Release justification: This work is part of the CockroachDB core deprecation.

There is a data race in TestQueryCache related to license/enforcer.go.
This test is unique because it runs parallel tests that start a mock
server, going through the SQL startup code. Since the license enforcer
is a singleton, each parallel goroutine shares the same enforcer object.
This commit addresses two issues:

1. The Enforcer.db variable can be set twice and is otherwise unprotected.
Since the db is only needed during setup, I’ve removed the variable from
the struct for now. I may need to reintroduce it later, but I’ll ensure
it doesn’t break this test when I do.

2. The creation of the singleton in GetEnforcerInstance can cause a data
race on the instance variable. While there is a once.Do call to generate
the singleton, there was an unnecessary instance == nil check before it.
I’ve removed this check to prevent the data race.

Epic: CRDB-39988
Closes: #130034
Release note: None
@blathers-crl blathers-crl bot force-pushed the blathers/backport-release-23.2-130036 branch from 7e9df1d to 14492a1 Compare September 4, 2024 17:16
@blathers-crl blathers-crl bot added blathers-backport This is a backport that Blathers created automatically. O-robot Originated from a bot. labels Sep 4, 2024
@blathers-crl blathers-crl bot requested a review from fqazi September 4, 2024 17:16
Copy link
Author

blathers-crl bot commented Sep 4, 2024

Thanks for opening a backport.

Please check the backport criteria before merging:

  • Backports should only be created for serious
    issues
    or test-only changes.
  • Backports should not break backwards-compatibility.
  • Backports should change as little code as possible.
  • Backports should not change on-disk formats or node communication protocols.
  • Backports should not add new functionality (except as defined
    here).
  • Backports must not add, edit, or otherwise modify cluster versions; or add version gates.
  • All backports must be reviewed by the owning areas TL. For more information as to how that review should be conducted, please consult the backport
    policy
    .
If your backport adds new functionality, please ensure that the following additional criteria are satisfied:
  • There is a high priority need for the functionality that cannot wait until the next release and is difficult to address in another way.
  • The new functionality is additive-only and only runs for clusters which have specifically “opted in” to it (e.g. by a cluster setting).
  • New code is protected by a conditional check that is trivial to verify and ensures that it only runs for opt-in clusters. State changes must be further protected such that nodes running old binaries will not be negatively impacted by the new state (with a mixed version test added).
  • The PM and TL on the team that owns the changed code have signed off that the change obeys the above rules.
  • Your backport must be accompanied by a post to the appropriate Slack
    channel (#db-backports-point-releases or #db-backports-XX-X-release) for awareness and discussion.

Also, please add a brief release justification to the body of your PR to justify this
backport.

@blathers-crl blathers-crl bot added the backport Label PR's that are backports to older release branches label Sep 4, 2024
Copy link
Author

blathers-crl bot commented Sep 4, 2024

It looks like your PR touches production code but doesn't add or edit any test code. Did you consider adding tests to your PR?

🦉 Hoot! I am a Blathers, a bot for CockroachDB. My owner is dev-inf.

@cockroach-teamcity
Copy link
Member

This change is Reviewable

@spilchen spilchen merged commit 0588fa3 into release-23.2 Sep 5, 2024
5 of 6 checks passed
@spilchen spilchen deleted the blathers/backport-release-23.2-130036 branch September 5, 2024 17:26
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
backport Label PR's that are backports to older release branches blathers-backport This is a backport that Blathers created automatically. O-robot Originated from a bot.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants