tree d684fc80a38285242ee8b1e494c462f40a361886
parent 3154ce262c73bf5daecedbad78183d1d3d1fc648
author Kostya Kortchinsky <kostyak@google.com> 1570469859 +0000
committer Kostya Kortchinsky <kostyak@google.com> 1570469859 +0000

[scudo][standalone] Correct releaseToOS behavior

Summary:
There was an issue in `releaseToOSMaybe`: one of the criteria to
decide if we should proceed with the release was wrong. Namely:

```
const uptr N = Sci->Stats.PoppedBlocks - Sci->Stats.PushedBlocks;
if (N * BlockSize < PageSize)
  return; // No chance to release anything.
```

I meant to check if the amount of bytes in the free list was lower
than a page, but this actually checks if the amount of **in use** bytes
was lower than a page.

The correct code is:

```
const uptr BytesInFreeList =
  Region->AllocatedUser -
  (Region->Stats.PoppedBlocks - Region->Stats.PushedBlocks) * BlockSize;
if (BytesInFreeList < PageSize)
  return 0; // No chance to release anything.
```

Consequences of the bug:
- if a class size has less than a page worth of in-use bytes (allocated
  or in a cache), reclaiming would not occur, whatever the amount of
  blocks in the free list; in real world scenarios this is unlikely to
  happen and be impactful;
- if a class size had less than a page worth of free bytes (and enough
  in-use bytes, etc), then reclaiming would be attempted, with likely
  no result. This means the reclaiming was overzealous at times.

I didn't have a good way to test for this, so I changed the prototype
of the function to return the number of bytes released, allowing to
get the information needed. The test added fails with the initial
criteria.

Another issue is that `ReleaseToOsInterval` can actually be 0, meaning
we always try to release (side note: it's terrible for performances).
so change a `> 0` check to `>= 0`.

Additionally, decrease the `CanRelease` threshold to `PageSize / 32`.
I still have to make that configurable but I will do it at another time.

Finally, rename some variables in `printStats`: I feel like "available"
was too ambiguous, so change it to "total".

Reviewers: morehouse, hctim, eugenis, vitalybuka, cferris

Reviewed By: morehouse

Subscribers: delcypher, #sanitizers, llvm-commits

Tags: #llvm, #sanitizers

Differential Revision: https://reviews.llvm.org/D68471

git-svn-id: https://llvm.org/svn/llvm-project/compiler-rt/trunk@373930 91177308-0d34-0410-b5e6-96231b3b80d8