crypto/tls: fix deadlock when racing to complete handshake.

After renegotiation support was added (af125a5193) it's possible for a
Write to block on a Read when racing to complete the handshake:
   1. The Write determines that a handshake is needed and tries to
      take the neccesary locks in the correct order.
   2. The Read also determines that a handshake is needed and wins
      the race to take the locks.
   3. The Read goroutine completes the handshake and wins a race
      to unlock and relock c.in, which it'll hold when waiting for
      more network data.

If the application-level protocol requires the Write to complete before
data can be read then the system as a whole will deadlock.

Unfortunately it doesn't appear possible to reverse the locking order of
c.in and handshakeMutex because we might read a renegotiation request at
any point and need to be able to do a handshake without unlocking.

So this change adds a sync.Cond that indicates that a goroutine has
committed to doing a handshake. Other interested goroutines can wait on
that Cond when needed.

The test for this isn't great. I was able to reproduce the deadlock with
it only when building with -race. (Because -race happened to alter the
timing just enough.)

Fixes #17101.

Change-Id: I4e8757f7b82a84e46c9963a977d089f0fb675495
Reviewed-on: https://go-review.googlesource.com/29164
Reviewed-by: Brad Fitzpatrick <bradfitz@golang.org>
Reviewed-by: Ian Lance Taylor <iant@golang.org>

src/crypto/tls/conn.go

@@ -29,10 +29,14 @@ type Conn struct {
 
 	// constant after handshake; protected by handshakeMutex
 	handshakeMutex sync.Mutex // handshakeMutex < in.Mutex, out.Mutex, errMutex
-	handshakeErr   error      // error resulting from handshake
-	vers           uint16     // TLS version
-	haveVers       bool       // version has been negotiated
-	config         *Config    // configuration passed to constructor
+	// handshakeCond, if not nil, indicates that a goroutine is committed
+	// to running the handshake for this Conn. Other goroutines that need
+	// to wait for the handshake can wait on this, under handshakeMutex.
+	handshakeCond *sync.Cond
+	handshakeErr  error   // error resulting from handshake
+	vers          uint16  // TLS version
+	haveVers      bool    // version has been negotiated
+	config        *Config // configuration passed to constructor
 	// handshakeComplete is true if the connection is currently transfering
 	// application data (i.e. is not currently processing a handshake).
 	handshakeComplete bool
@@ -1206,26 +1210,50 @@ func (c *Conn) Handshake() error {
 	// need to check whether a handshake is pending (such as Write) to
 	// block.
 	//
-	// Thus we take c.handshakeMutex first and, if we find that a handshake
-	// is needed, then we unlock, acquire c.in and c.handshakeMutex in the
-	// correct order, and check again.
+	// Thus we first take c.handshakeMutex to check whether a handshake is
+	// needed.
+	//
+	// If so then, previously, this code would unlock handshakeMutex and
+	// then lock c.in and handshakeMutex in the correct order to run the
+	// handshake. The problem was that it was possible for a Read to
+	// complete the handshake once handshakeMutex was unlocked and then
+	// keep c.in while waiting for network data. Thus a concurrent
+	// operation could be blocked on c.in.
+	//
+	// Thus handshakeCond is used to signal that a goroutine is committed
+	// to running the handshake and other goroutines can wait on it if they
+	// need. handshakeCond is protected by handshakeMutex.
 	c.handshakeMutex.Lock()
 	defer c.handshakeMutex.Unlock()
 
-	for i := 0; i < 2; i++ {
-		if i == 1 {
-			c.handshakeMutex.Unlock()
-			c.in.Lock()
-			defer c.in.Unlock()
-			c.handshakeMutex.Lock()
-		}
-
+	for {
 		if err := c.handshakeErr; err != nil {
 			return err
 		}
 		if c.handshakeComplete {
 			return nil
 		}
+		if c.handshakeCond == nil {
+			break
+		}
+
+		c.handshakeCond.Wait()
+	}
+
+	// Set handshakeCond to indicate that this goroutine is committing to
+	// running the handshake.
+	c.handshakeCond = sync.NewCond(&c.handshakeMutex)
+	c.handshakeMutex.Unlock()
+
+	c.in.Lock()
+	defer c.in.Unlock()
+
+	c.handshakeMutex.Lock()
+
+	// The handshake cannot have completed when handshakeMutex was unlocked
+	// because this goroutine set handshakeCond.
+	if c.handshakeErr != nil || c.handshakeComplete {
+		panic("handshake should not have been able to complete after handshakeCond was set")
 	}
 
 	if c.isClient {
@@ -1240,6 +1268,16 @@ func (c *Conn) Handshake() error {
 		// alert that might be left in the buffer.
 		c.flush()
 	}
+
+	if c.handshakeErr == nil && !c.handshakeComplete {
+		panic("handshake should have had a result.")
+	}
+
+	// Wake any other goroutines that are waiting for this handshake to
+	// complete.
+	c.handshakeCond.Broadcast()
+	c.handshakeCond = nil
+
 	return c.handshakeErr
 }
 

src/crypto/tls/handshake_client_test.go

@@ -1168,3 +1168,57 @@ func TestAlertFlushing(t *testing.T) {
 		t.Errorf("expected server handshake to complete with one write, but saw %d", n)
 	}
 }
+
+func TestHandshakeRace(t *testing.T) {
+	// This test races a Read and Write to try and complete a handshake in
+	// order to provide some evidence that there are no races or deadlocks
+	// in the handshake locking.
+	for i := 0; i < 32; i++ {
+		c, s := net.Pipe()
+
+		go func() {
+			server := Server(s, testConfig)
+			if err := server.Handshake(); err != nil {
+				panic(err)
+			}
+
+			var request [1]byte
+			if n, err := server.Read(request[:]); err != nil || n != 1 {
+				panic(err)
+			}
+
+			server.Write(request[:])
+			server.Close()
+		}()
+
+		startWrite := make(chan struct{})
+		startRead := make(chan struct{})
+		readDone := make(chan struct{})
+
+		client := Client(c, testConfig)
+		go func() {
+			<-startWrite
+			var request [1]byte
+			client.Write(request[:])
+		}()
+
+		go func() {
+			<-startRead
+			var reply [1]byte
+			if n, err := client.Read(reply[:]); err != nil || n != 1 {
+				panic(err)
+			}
+			c.Close()
+			readDone <- struct{}{}
+		}()
+
+		if i&1 == 1 {
+			startWrite <- struct{}{}
+			startRead <- struct{}{}
+		} else {
+			startRead <- struct{}{}
+			startWrite <- struct{}{}
+		}
+		<-readDone
+	}
+}