* Re: [RFA] Fix memory leak in windows_xfer_shared_libraries
[not found] <50c9b7e6.25f2440a.3810.3771SMTPIN_ADDED_BROKEN@mx.google.com>
@ 2012-12-13 20:16 ` Pedro Alves
2012-12-14 7:53 ` Pierre Muller
0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Pedro Alves @ 2012-12-13 20:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Pierre Muller; +Cc: gdb-patches
On 12/13/2012 11:11 AM, Pierre Muller wrote:
> --- windows-nat.c 13 Nov 2012 09:46:10 -0000 1.236
> +++ windows-nat.c 13 Dec 2012 10:54:18 -0000
> @@ -2411,11 +2411,11 @@ windows_xfer_shared_libraries (struct ta
> buf = obstack_finish (&obstack);
> len_avail = strlen (buf);
> if (offset >= len_avail)
> - return 0;
> -
> - if (len > len_avail - offset)
> + len= 0
> + else if (len > len_avail - offset)
> len = len_avail - offset;
> - memcpy (readbuf, buf + offset, len);
> + if (len > 0)
> + memcpy (readbuf, buf + offset, len);
>
You can avoid the last if by writing as:
if (offset >= len_avail)
len = 0;
else
{
if (len > len_avail - offset)
len = len_avail - offset;
memcpy (readbuf, buf + offset, len);
}
I'd prefer that, but patch is okay either way.
> obstack_free (&obstack, NULL);
> return len;
>
> I was also wondering if it would not be better to keep the obstack in
> between the two calls, but that would probably require some static variable
> :(
That'd be fine. We actually do that in some cases in gdbserver, like
handle_qxfer_threads and handle_qxfer_traceframe_info. It just didn't
look like worth it enough to bother when I initially wrote this.
--
Pedro Alves
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* RE: [RFA] Fix memory leak in windows_xfer_shared_libraries
2012-12-13 20:16 ` [RFA] Fix memory leak in windows_xfer_shared_libraries Pedro Alves
@ 2012-12-14 7:53 ` Pierre Muller
2012-12-14 10:12 ` Pedro Alves
0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Pierre Muller @ 2012-12-14 7:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: 'Pedro Alves'; +Cc: gdb-patches
> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org [mailto:gdb-patches-
> owner@sourceware.org] De la part de Pedro Alves
> Envoyé : jeudi 13 décembre 2012 21:16
> À : Pierre Muller
> Cc : gdb-patches@sourceware.org
> Objet : Re: [RFA] Fix memory leak in windows_xfer_shared_libraries
>
> On 12/13/2012 11:11 AM, Pierre Muller wrote:
> > --- windows-nat.c 13 Nov 2012 09:46:10 -0000 1.236
> > +++ windows-nat.c 13 Dec 2012 10:54:18 -0000
> > @@ -2411,11 +2411,11 @@ windows_xfer_shared_libraries (struct ta
> > buf = obstack_finish (&obstack);
> > len_avail = strlen (buf);
> > if (offset >= len_avail)
> > - return 0;
> > -
> > - if (len > len_avail - offset)
> > + len= 0
> > + else if (len > len_avail - offset)
> > len = len_avail - offset;
> > - memcpy (readbuf, buf + offset, len);
> > + if (len > 0)
> > + memcpy (readbuf, buf + offset, len);
> >
>
> You can avoid the last if by writing as:
>
> if (offset >= len_avail)
> len = 0;
> else
> {
> if (len > len_avail - offset)
> len = len_avail - offset;
> memcpy (readbuf, buf + offset, len);
> }
>
> I'd prefer that, but patch is okay either way.
I committed with your modification.
Thanks for the approval.
> > obstack_free (&obstack, NULL);
> > return len;
>
> >
> > I was also wondering if it would not be better to keep the obstack in
> > between the two calls, but that would probably require some static
> variable
> > :(
>
> That'd be fine. We actually do that in some cases in gdbserver, like
> handle_qxfer_threads and handle_qxfer_traceframe_info. It just didn't
> look like worth it enough to bother when I initially wrote this.
I was wondering if this would become a problem if we later add support for
multiple inferior
for windows-nat
I vaguely remember that I tried to achieve this a long time ago...
Anyhow, the memory leak is gone at least!
Pierre
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [RFA] Fix memory leak in windows_xfer_shared_libraries
2012-12-14 7:53 ` Pierre Muller
@ 2012-12-14 10:12 ` Pedro Alves
2012-12-14 10:26 ` [RFA] Fix other memory leak in solib_target_current_sos Pierre Muller
[not found] ` <43198.6185875305$1355480794@news.gmane.org>
0 siblings, 2 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Pedro Alves @ 2012-12-14 10:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Pierre Muller; +Cc: gdb-patches
On 12/14/2012 07:53 AM, Pierre Muller wrote:
>>> I was also wondering if it would not be better to keep the obstack in
>>> between the two calls, but that would probably require some static
>> variable
>>> :(
>>
>> That'd be fine. We actually do that in some cases in gdbserver, like
>> handle_qxfer_threads and handle_qxfer_traceframe_info. It just didn't
>> look like worth it enough to bother when I initially wrote this.
>
> I was wondering if this would become a problem if we later add support for
> multiple inferior
> for windows-nat
I don't think so.
> I vaguely remember that I tried to achieve this a long time ago...
ISTR you had an archer branch for that and other Windows stuff.
>
> Anyhow, the memory leak is gone at least!
Thanks.
--
Pedro Alves
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* [RFA] Fix other memory leak in solib_target_current_sos
2012-12-14 10:12 ` Pedro Alves
@ 2012-12-14 10:26 ` Pierre Muller
2012-12-14 10:55 ` Pedro Alves
[not found] ` <43198.6185875305$1355480794@news.gmane.org>
1 sibling, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Pierre Muller @ 2012-12-14 10:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: 'Pedro Alves'; +Cc: gdb-patches
> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org [mailto:gdb-patches-
> owner@sourceware.org] De la part de Pedro Alves
> Envoyé : vendredi 14 décembre 2012 10:45
> À : Pierre Muller
> Cc : gdb-patches@sourceware.org
> Objet : Re: [RFA] Fix memory leak in windows_xfer_shared_libraries
>
> On 12/14/2012 07:53 AM, Pierre Muller wrote:
>
> >>> I was also wondering if it would not be better to keep the obstack
in
> >>> between the two calls, but that would probably require some static
> >> variable
> >>> :(
> >>
> >> That'd be fine. We actually do that in some cases in gdbserver, like
> >> handle_qxfer_threads and handle_qxfer_traceframe_info. It just didn't
> >> look like worth it enough to bother when I initially wrote this.
> >
> > I was wondering if this would become a problem if we later add support
> for
> > multiple inferior
> > for windows-nat
>
> I don't think so.
>
> > I vaguely remember that I tried to achieve this a long time ago...
>
> ISTR you had an archer branch for that and other Windows stuff.
Oh, no...
I completely forgot that :(
It's been a loooong time since I last worked on that :(
> >
> > Anyhow, the memory leak is gone at least!
I found another leak, down the same line,
solib_target_current_sos
calls target_read_stralloc
which as its name suggests allocates the result on the heap...
But that string was not freed in the current code...
This patch fixes that leak.
2012-12-14 Pierre Muller <muller@sourceware.org>
* solib-target.c (solib_target_current_sos): Remove 'const'
qualifier from type of library_document local variable to be
able to free it and avoid a memory leak.
Index: src/gdb/solib-target.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gdb/solib-target.c,v
retrieving revision 1.24
diff -u -p -r1.24 solib-target.c
--- src/gdb/solib-target.c 4 Jan 2012 08:17:11 -0000 1.24
+++ src/gdb/solib-target.c 14 Dec 2012 10:17:58 -0000
@@ -246,7 +246,7 @@ static struct so_list *
solib_target_current_sos (void)
{
struct so_list *new_solib, *start = NULL, *last = NULL;
- const char *library_document;
+ char *library_document;
VEC(lm_info_p) *library_list;
struct lm_info *info;
int ix;
@@ -261,7 +261,10 @@ solib_target_current_sos (void)
/* Parse the list. */
library_list = solib_target_parse_libraries (library_document);
if (library_list == NULL)
- return NULL;
+ {
+ xfree (library_document);
+ return NULL;
+ }
/* Build a struct so_list for each entry on the list. */
for (ix = 0; VEC_iterate (lm_info_p, library_list, ix, info); ix++)
@@ -291,6 +294,9 @@ solib_target_current_sos (void)
/* Free the library list, but not its members. */
VEC_free (lm_info_p, library_list);
+ /* Also free allocated library_document string. */
+ xfree (library_document);
+
return start;
}
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [RFA] Fix other memory leak in solib_target_current_sos
2012-12-14 10:26 ` [RFA] Fix other memory leak in solib_target_current_sos Pierre Muller
@ 2012-12-14 10:55 ` Pedro Alves
2012-12-14 13:07 ` [RFA-v2] " Pierre Muller
0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Pedro Alves @ 2012-12-14 10:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Pierre Muller; +Cc: gdb-patches
On 12/14/2012 10:25 AM, Pierre Muller wrote:
> I found another leak, down the same line,
> solib_target_current_sos
> calls target_read_stralloc
> which as its name suggests allocates the result on the heap...
> But that string was not freed in the current code...
>
> This patch fixes that leak.
Thanks.
> 2012-12-14 Pierre Muller <muller@sourceware.org>
>
> * solib-target.c (solib_target_current_sos): Remove 'const'
> qualifier from type of library_document local variable to be
> able to free it and avoid a memory leak.
>
> Index: src/gdb/solib-target.c
> ===================================================================
> RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gdb/solib-target.c,v
> retrieving revision 1.24
> diff -u -p -r1.24 solib-target.c
> --- src/gdb/solib-target.c 4 Jan 2012 08:17:11 -0000 1.24
> +++ src/gdb/solib-target.c 14 Dec 2012 10:17:58 -0000
> @@ -246,7 +246,7 @@ static struct so_list *
> solib_target_current_sos (void)
> {
> struct so_list *new_solib, *start = NULL, *last = NULL;
> - const char *library_document;
> + char *library_document;
> VEC(lm_info_p) *library_list;
> struct lm_info *info;
> int ix;
> @@ -261,7 +261,10 @@ solib_target_current_sos (void)
> /* Parse the list. */
> library_list = solib_target_parse_libraries (library_document);
> if (library_list == NULL)
> - return NULL;
> + {
> + xfree (library_document);
> + return NULL;
> + }
>
> /* Build a struct so_list for each entry on the list. */
> for (ix = 0; VEC_iterate (lm_info_p, library_list, ix, info); ix++)
> @@ -291,6 +294,9 @@ solib_target_current_sos (void)
> /* Free the library list, but not its members. */
> VEC_free (lm_info_p, library_list);
>
> + /* Also free allocated library_document string. */
> + xfree (library_document);
> +
> return start;
> }
>
Parsing XML, within solib_target_parse_libraries, may throw. Thus, a
cleanup would be better:
+ old_chain = make_cleanup (xfree, library_document);
library_list = solib_target_parse_libraries (library_document);
+ do_cleanups (old_chain);
--
Pedro Alves
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* [RFA-v2] Fix other memory leak in solib_target_current_sos
2012-12-14 10:55 ` Pedro Alves
@ 2012-12-14 13:07 ` Pierre Muller
2012-12-14 13:49 ` Pedro Alves
0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Pierre Muller @ 2012-12-14 13:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: 'Pedro Alves'; +Cc: gdb-patches
> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org [mailto:gdb-patches-
> owner@sourceware.org] De la part de Pedro Alves
> Envoyé : vendredi 14 décembre 2012 11:55
> À : Pierre Muller
> Cc : gdb-patches@sourceware.org
> Objet : Re: [RFA] Fix other memory leak in solib_target_current_sos
>
> On 12/14/2012 10:25 AM, Pierre Muller wrote:
>
> > I found another leak, down the same line,
> > solib_target_current_sos
> > calls target_read_stralloc
> > which as its name suggests allocates the result on the heap...
> > But that string was not freed in the current code...
> >
> > This patch fixes that leak.
>
> Thanks.
>
> > 2012-12-14 Pierre Muller <muller@sourceware.org>
> >
> > * solib-target.c (solib_target_current_sos): Remove 'const'
> > qualifier from type of library_document local variable to be
> > able to free it and avoid a memory leak.
> >
> > Index: src/gdb/solib-target.c
> > ===================================================================
> > RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gdb/solib-target.c,v
> > retrieving revision 1.24
> > diff -u -p -r1.24 solib-target.c
> > --- src/gdb/solib-target.c 4 Jan 2012 08:17:11 -0000 1.24
> > +++ src/gdb/solib-target.c 14 Dec 2012 10:17:58 -0000
> > @@ -246,7 +246,7 @@ static struct so_list *
> > solib_target_current_sos (void)
> > {
> > struct so_list *new_solib, *start = NULL, *last = NULL;
> > - const char *library_document;
> > + char *library_document;
> > VEC(lm_info_p) *library_list;
> > struct lm_info *info;
> > int ix;
> > @@ -261,7 +261,10 @@ solib_target_current_sos (void)
> > /* Parse the list. */
> > library_list = solib_target_parse_libraries (library_document);
> > if (library_list == NULL)
> > - return NULL;
> > + {
> > + xfree (library_document);
> > + return NULL;
> > + }
> >
> > /* Build a struct so_list for each entry on the list. */
> > for (ix = 0; VEC_iterate (lm_info_p, library_list, ix, info); ix++)
> > @@ -291,6 +294,9 @@ solib_target_current_sos (void)
> > /* Free the library list, but not its members. */
> > VEC_free (lm_info_p, library_list);
> >
> > + /* Also free allocated library_document string. */
> > + xfree (library_document);
> > +
> > return start;
> > }
> >
>
> Parsing XML, within solib_target_parse_libraries, may throw. Thus, a
> cleanup would be better:
>
> + old_chain = make_cleanup (xfree, library_document);
> library_list = solib_target_parse_libraries (library_document);
> + do_cleanups (old_chain);
Of course...
library_document isn't needed after that point anymore.
New version of the patch below.
Pierre
2012-12-14 Pierre Muller <muller@sourceware.org>
Pedro Alves <palves@redhat.com>
* solib-target.c (solib_target_current_sos): Remove 'const'
qualifier from type of library_document local variable to be
able to free it and avoid a memory leak.
Use cleanup chain to avoid leak even if exceptino is generated.
Index: solib-target.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gdb/solib-target.c,v
retrieving revision 1.24
diff -u -p -r1.24 solib-target.c
--- solib-target.c 4 Jan 2012 08:17:11 -0000 1.24
+++ solib-target.c 14 Dec 2012 13:03:13 -0000
@@ -246,7 +246,8 @@ static struct so_list *
solib_target_current_sos (void)
{
struct so_list *new_solib, *start = NULL, *last = NULL;
- const char *library_document;
+ char *library_document;
+ struct cleanup *old_chain;
VEC(lm_info_p) *library_list;
struct lm_info *info;
int ix;
@@ -258,8 +259,15 @@ solib_target_current_sos (void)
if (library_document == NULL)
return NULL;
+ /* solib_target_parse_libraries may throw, so we use a cleanup. */
+ old_chain = make_cleanup (xfree, library_document);
+
/* Parse the list. */
library_list = solib_target_parse_libraries (library_document);
+
+ /* library_document string is not needed behind this point. */
+ do_cleanups (old_chain);
+
if (library_list == NULL)
return NULL;
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [RFA-v2] Fix other memory leak in solib_target_current_sos
2012-12-14 13:07 ` [RFA-v2] " Pierre Muller
@ 2012-12-14 13:49 ` Pedro Alves
0 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Pedro Alves @ 2012-12-14 13:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Pierre Muller; +Cc: gdb-patches
On 12/14/2012 01:07 PM, Pierre Muller wrote:
> New version of the patch below.
OK.
Thanks.
--
Pedro Alves
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* Re: [RFA] Fix other memory leak in solib_target_current_sos
[not found] ` <43198.6185875305$1355480794@news.gmane.org>
@ 2012-12-14 14:14 ` Tom Tromey
2012-12-14 23:29 ` Pierre Muller
0 siblings, 1 reply; 9+ messages in thread
From: Tom Tromey @ 2012-12-14 14:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Pierre Muller; +Cc: 'Pedro Alves', gdb-patches
>>>>> "Pierre" == Pierre Muller <pierre.muller@ics-cnrs.unistra.fr> writes:
Pierre> library_list = solib_target_parse_libraries (library_document);
Pierre> if (library_list == NULL)
Pierre> - return NULL;
Pierre> + {
Pierre> + xfree (library_document);
Pierre> + return NULL;
Pierre> + }
It seems to me that you could unconditionally free it here, before the if.
Tom
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
* RE: [RFA] Fix other memory leak in solib_target_current_sos
2012-12-14 14:14 ` [RFA] " Tom Tromey
@ 2012-12-14 23:29 ` Pierre Muller
0 siblings, 0 replies; 9+ messages in thread
From: Pierre Muller @ 2012-12-14 23:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: 'Tom Tromey'; +Cc: 'Pedro Alves', gdb-patches
> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org [mailto:gdb-patches-
> owner@sourceware.org] De la part de Tom Tromey
> Envoyé : vendredi 14 décembre 2012 15:14
> À : Pierre Muller
> Cc : 'Pedro Alves'; gdb-patches@sourceware.org
> Objet : Re: [RFA] Fix other memory leak in solib_target_current_sos
>
> >>>>> "Pierre" == Pierre Muller <pierre.muller@ics-cnrs.unistra.fr>
writes:
>
> Pierre> library_list = solib_target_parse_libraries (library_document);
> Pierre> if (library_list == NULL)
> Pierre> - return NULL;
> Pierre> + {
> Pierre> + xfree (library_document);
> Pierre> + return NULL;
> Pierre> + }
>
> It seems to me that you could unconditionally free it here, before the if.
That's what the committed version does
thanks to Pedro's suggestion....
Pierre
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 9+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2012-12-14 23:29 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <50c9b7e6.25f2440a.3810.3771SMTPIN_ADDED_BROKEN@mx.google.com>
2012-12-13 20:16 ` [RFA] Fix memory leak in windows_xfer_shared_libraries Pedro Alves
2012-12-14 7:53 ` Pierre Muller
2012-12-14 10:12 ` Pedro Alves
2012-12-14 10:26 ` [RFA] Fix other memory leak in solib_target_current_sos Pierre Muller
2012-12-14 10:55 ` Pedro Alves
2012-12-14 13:07 ` [RFA-v2] " Pierre Muller
2012-12-14 13:49 ` Pedro Alves
[not found] ` <43198.6185875305$1355480794@news.gmane.org>
2012-12-14 14:14 ` [RFA] " Tom Tromey
2012-12-14 23:29 ` Pierre Muller
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox