←back to thread

Futurelock: A subtle risk in async Rust

(rfd.shared.oxide.computer)
421 points bcantrill | 3 comments | 31 Oct 25 16:49 UTC | HN request time: 0.694s | source

This RFD describes our distillation of a really gnarly issue that we hit in the Oxide control plane.[0] Not unlike our discovery of the async cancellation issue[1][2][3], this is larger than the issue itself -- and worse, the program that hits futurelock is correct from the programmer's point of view. Fortunately, the surface area here is smaller than that of async cancellation and the conditions required to hit it can be relatively easily mitigated. Still, this is a pretty deep issue -- and something that took some very seasoned Rust hands quite a while to find.

[0] https://github.com/oxidecomputer/omicron/issues/9259

[1] https://rfd.shared.oxide.computer/rfd/397

[2] https://rfd.shared.oxide.computer/rfd/400

[3] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zrv5Cy1R7r4

Show context
orthecreedence ◴[31 Oct 25 20:23 UTC] No.45776307[source]▶
Great read, and the example code makes sense. This stuff can be a nightmare to find, but once you do it's like a giant 1000 piece puzzle just clicks together instantly.
replies(1): >>45776768 #
bcantrill ◴[31 Oct 25 21:13 UTC] No.45776768[source]▶
Indeed. One of the interesting side effects of being a remote company that records everything[0] is that we have the instant where the "1000 piece puzzle just clicks together" recorded, and it's honestly pretty wild. In this case, it was very much a shared brainstorming between four engineers (Eliza, Sean, John and Dave) -- and there is almost a passing of the baton where they start to imagine the kind of scenario that could induce this and then realize that those are exactly the conditions that exist in the software.

We are (on brand?) going to do a podcast episode on this on Monday[1]; ahead of that conversation I'm going to get a clip of that video out, just because it's interesting to see the team work together to debug it.

[0] https://rfd.shared.oxide.computer/rfd/0537

[1] https://discord.gg/QrcKGTTPrF?event=1433923627988029462

replies(1): >>45777008 #
1. mycoliza ◴[31 Oct 25 21:41 UTC] No.45777008[source]▶
As a member of (Eliza, Sean, John, and Dave), I can second that debugging this was certainly an adventure. I'm not going to go as far as to say that we had fun, since...you can't have a heroic narrative without real struggle. But it was certainly rewarding to be in the room for that "a-ha!" moment, in which all the pieces really did begin to fit together very quickly. It was like the climax of a detective story --- and it was particularly well-scripted the way each of us contributed a little piece of the puzzle.
replies(1): >>45777424 #
2. littlestymaar ◴[31 Oct 25 22:33 UTC] No.45777424[source]▶
Since you are of of the people working directly on this codebase, may I ask you why is select! being used/allowed in the first place?

Its footgun-y nature has been known for years (IIRC even the first version of the tokio documentation warned against that) and as such I don't really understand why people are still using it. (For context I was the lead of a Rust team working on a pretty complex async networking program and we had banned select! very early in the project and never regretted this decision once).

replies(1): >>45777635 #
3. 0xdeafbeef ◴[31 Oct 25 22:57 UTC] No.45777635[source]▶
What to use instead?