Libdmtcp initialization
There appears to be a fundamental flaw in the design of the initialization within libdmtcp.
The current design is this:
dmtcp_initialize() // Single point of entry for initialization
if (initialized)
return;
...
Init_Wrappers()
Init_Ckpt_Thread()
DmtcpWorker() // libdmtcp Constructor
dmtcp_initialize()
dmtcp*wrapper() // Any wrapper function
if (!initialized)
dmtcp_initialize()
...
In the previous design, all the initialization work used to happen in the constructor. However, that design failed because some base library (e.g., libmpi.so), which gets initialized ahead of libdmtcp.so, could call a wrapper function in its constructor. We had multiple hacks to make this work.
As a result, we came up with a new design (the current design), where
we removed this dependency on the DmtcpWorker
constructor and created
a single point-of-entry for initialization: dmtcp_initialize()
. This
way even if a wrapper function is called by some library before control
gets to DmtcpWorker
, we do the right thing.
This design has been there for a while and seems to work in most cases. But I realized today that there’s a fundamental flaw.
The core issue is that before the control reaches the DmtcpWorker
constructor, we are not sure that the malloc library (which is a
base library, along with libc, libpthread, etc.) has been initialized
or not.
So, this design breaks down when a malloc library (e.g., jemalloc) calls a wrapper function during its initialization, which then calls some libc function that wants to call malloc again. For example, even creating the ckpt thread requires a call to pthread_create(), which wants to call malloc.
This brings us to one possible solution. I think the key principle we need to follow is this:
Until the control gets to the
DmtcpWorker
constructor, we cannot directly or indirectly (through a libc call) call a function that can call malloc.
The idea is to split the initialization of libdmtcp into two phases: (a) one which is safe to do before the constructor is called, and (b) one which is safe to do after the constructor has been called.
For (a), we need to ensure that any of the wrapper functions does not directly or indirectly call malloc. (Note: we can still call our internal JALLOC allocation calls during any of the phases.)