Dynamically realloc 2 dim array in callback function of sqlite - c

I am working on a sqlite-.dll for educational purpose.
I am trying to dynamically add a row in my 2 dimensional array for each time the callback function is called with a new row from the database. (e.g. SELECT * FROM CUSTOMER).
The data stored in this array should then be returned as a C-Interface.
SQLCONTROL_API char** sql_execQuery(char *dbName, char *sqlStatement)
{
char **a = 0;
/*Some sqlite stuff*/
int rc = sqlite3_exec(db, sqlStatement, callback, &a, &zErrMsg);
return a;
}
With the callback function:
static int callback(void *data, int argc, char **argv, char **azColName)
{
char **old = (char **)data;
int num_rows = sizeof(old) / sizeof(old[0]);
int num_cols = sizeof(old[0]) / sizeof(old[0][0]);
old = (char **)realloc(old, (num_rows + 1) * sizeof(char *));
for (int i = 0; i < (num_rows + 1); i++)
old[i] = (char *)realloc(old[i], argc * sizeof(char *));
/*I am trying to create a 2 dim array that looks like a table,
so the column names are in the first row,
then the data from the table is stored in each row*/
for (int i = 0; i < argc; i++)
{
if (num_rows == 1)
old[0][i] = *azColName[i];
old[num_rows][i] = *argv[i];
}
data = old;
return 0;
}
When inserting data to the database, everything works fine. But when I try to retrieve data, I get read access violation.
Now my question, am I on the right way with my approach or do I miss some important requirements for my intention?

In your sql_execQuery(), you declare a as a char **, and you pass its address, &a, as the fourth argument of sqlite3_exec(). That argument therefore has type char ***, and it points to a location somewhere in the program's stack. There's nothing inherently wrong with that.
But then we get to callback(), which has serious problems, principal among them:
It treats the data pointer as if it were of type char **, instead of the correct type, char ***. If that were your only problem, you could fix it like this:
char **old = *(char ***)data;
// ...
*(char ***)data = old;
It tries to compute the dimensions of the allocated space via the sizeof operator, as would be reasonable if old were, in fact, a 2D array, but it is not an array at all. It is a pointer to pointer to char, so sizeof(old) is the size of a pointer (to pointer to char), sizeof(old[0]) is the size of a pointer (to char) and sizeof(old[0][0]) is the size of a char. This does not tell you anything about how much space has been allocated.
After allocating memory for old, it dereferences the parts of the allocated memory without initializing them, by passing them to realloc(). Generally, all but one of these will have been initialized, but the one uninitialized one causes realloc() to exhibit undefined behavior.
You fail to check for allocation errors.
It looks like you need a more complex data structure to be passed through to your callback, so that you can track the allocated dimensions. Something like this, for example:
struct mytable {
char **data;
size_t dim;
};
SQLCONTROL_API char** sql_execQuery(char *dbName, char *sqlStatement)
{
struct mytable a = { NULL, 0 };
// ...
int rc = sqlite3_exec(db, sqlStatement, callback, &a, &zErrMsg);
return a.data;
}
static int callback(void *data, int argc, char **argv, char **azColName)
{
struct mytable *old = data;
char **temp;
old->dim++;
temp = realloc(old->data, old->dim * sizeof(*old->data));
if (temp) {
old->data = temp;
old->data[old->dim - 1] = NULL;
} else {
// handle allocation error ...
}
for (int i = 0; i < old->dim; i++) {
char *temp2 = realloc(old->data[i], argc * sizeof(*old->data[i]));
if (temp2) {
old->data[i] = temp2;
old->data[i][argc - 1] = NULL;
} else {
// handle allocation error ...
}
}
// ... other stuff ...
// no need for anything like data = old
return 0;
}

Related

Creating Dynamic array as part of struct vs dynamic int array

I am working with dynamic arrays, consider two scenarios -
Scenario 1:
typedef struct
{
int *array;
int dataPtr;
} A;
static A dynaArray;
//Call the function as
dynaAdd(&dynaArray, <pointer to data block>, <length> );
static bool dynaAdd(A *data, int *dataCopy, int len)
{
int newlen = (data->dataPtr + len);
data->array = (int *) realloc(data->array, newlen * sizeof(int));
if (!data->array)
{
return FALSE;
}
memcpy(&data->array[data->dataPtr], dataCopy, len* sizeof(int));
data->dataPtr += len; // update data ptr
return TRUE;
}
I create a static struct A data (say) and pass to a function as pointer which reallocates length for A->array everytime and adds data to it, maintaining a dataPtr for index. This works perfectly fine where I can create an A->array of say length 100, use the data and free the pointer and null.
On the other scenario 2 -
static int *dynArray;
//Call the function as
dynaAdd(dynaArray, <pointer to data block>, <len>, <dataIdx> );
static bool dynaAdd(int *data, int *dataCopy, int len, int dataIdx)
{
int newlen = (dataIdx + len);
data = (int *) realloc(data, newlen * sizeof(int));
if (!data)
{
return FALSE;
}
memcpy(&data[dataIdx], dataCopy, len* sizeof(int));
dataIdx += len ;
return TRUE;
}
I just use int *array instead of struct, maintaining a static int dataPtr(say) to keep track of the next index, pass the array pointer to the function and dynamically grow the array and add contents to it. However, the program crashes after creating some x length array (which keeps varying).
Can someone help understand the difference between the two approaches ? In both scenarios, the goal is to create a dynamic array and keep adding contents to it until the certain data index and then free the array.
Thank you.
In the second example, you're modifying data which is local to the function. Such a change is not reflected in the calling function, so dynArray doesn't change. And since you reallocated memory, if the memory moved then this pointer is now invalid and attempting to dereference it triggers undefined behavior.
You need to change the function to accept the address of a int *, i.e. an int **, for the first argument and make the corresponding changes. You'll also want to make dataIdx a int * so changes to that are also propagated back
So your function would now look like this:
static bool dynaAdd(int **data, int *dataCopy, int len, int *dataIdx)
{
int newlen = (*dataIdx + len);
*data = realloc(*data, newlen * sizeof(int));
if (!*data)
{
return FALSE;
}
memcpy(&(*data)[*dataIdx], dataCopy, len* sizeof(int));
*dataIdx += len ;
return TRUE;
}

How can I free memory and at the same time return a pointer?

I have these functions
char *hash(char *stringa, char *tipohash) {
if (strcmp(tipohash, "md5") == 0) {
stringa = md5(stringa);
}
return stringa;
}
char *md5(char *stringa) {
unsigned char risultato[MD5_DIGEST_LENGTH];
int i;
char *hashfinale = malloc(sizeof(char) * MD5_DIGEST_LENGTH * 2);
MD5((const unsigned char *)stringa, strlen(stringa), risultato);
for (i = 0; i < MD5_DIGEST_LENGTH; i++) {
sprintf(hashfinale + 2 * i, "%02x", risultato[i]);
}
return (char *)hashfinale;
}
How I can return (char *)hashfinale doing the free without losing the value of the string?
This is the caller
char *hashlinea = hash(stringa, hashType);
There are basically two ways to solve the problem, and none of them involves your code calling free.
The first way is to just do nothing different from now, except to add documentation so the user of your hash function knows that the code must call free on the returned pointer:
// This is the code using your function
char *hashlinea = hash(stringa,hashType);
// Some code using hashlinea
free(hashlinea);
The second way is to pass a pointer to an existing array, and your code use that array instead of allocating it using malloc:
char hashlinea[MD5_DIGEST_LENGTH*2];
hash(stringa, hashType, hashlinea);
For this your hash function needs to pass on the third argument to the md5 function, which should use it instead of allocating memory:
char *md5(char *stringa, char *hashfinale){
unsigned char risultato[MD5_DIGEST_LENGTH];
int i;
// No memory allocation here
MD5((const unsigned char *)stringa, strlen(stringa), risultato);
for(i = 0; i < MD5_DIGEST_LENGTH; i++) {
sprintf(hashfinale + 2*i,"%02x",risultato[i]);
}
return hashfinale;
}
It is not possible. IMO it is better to pass the pointer to the buffer. The caller will be responsible for the memory management
char *md5(char *stringa, char *hashfinale){
...
}
There is a problem in your md5 function: the size allocated for the MD5 hash must be one byte longer for the null terminator:
char *hashfinale = malloc(sizeof(char) * (MD5_DIGEST_LENGTH * 2 + 1));
Note that in C (and C++) sizeof(char) is 1 by definition, so you could just write:
char *hashfinale = malloc(MD5_DIGEST_LENGTH * 2 + 1);
Regarding your question, hash returns either its argument or an allocated object. This is a problem for memory management, as yo may not know later in the program if the return value must be freed or not. Passing the destination array for the hash string is a better alternative, otherwise you should duplicate the string so the return value of hash can be unconditionally freed:
char *md5(const char *stringa) {
unsigned char risultato[MD5_DIGEST_LENGTH];
int i;
char *hashfinale = malloc(MD5_DIGEST_LENGTH * 2 + 1);
MD5((const unsigned char *)stringa, strlen(stringa), risultato);
for (i = 0; i < MD5_DIGEST_LENGTH; i++) {
sprintf(hashfinale + 2 * i, "%02x", risultato[i]);
}
return hashfinale;
}
// always free the return value
char *hash(const char *stringa, const char *tipohash) {
if (!strcmp(tipohash, "md5")) {
return md5(stringa);
} else {
return strdup(stringa);
}
}

Garbage value even after initializing members of dynamically allocated struct array

I have a dynamically allocated array of structures, 'buff'. Each element is a structure that has a few integer variables and a pointer 'buffer_ptr' which points to another dynamically allocated array of structures. The size of both arrays is given as command line input.
int buffer_size;
int user_num;
struct tuple
{
char userID[5];
char topic[16];
int weight;
};
struct buff_ctrl
{
struct tuple* buffer_ptr;
int in;
int out;
int numItems;
int done;
};
The arrays are created and initialized in main() as follows:
int main(int argc, char* argv[])
{
void *status;
pthread_t mapThd;
if(argc != 4)
{
printf("Input format: ./combiner <buffer_size> <number_of_users> <input_file>\n");
return -1;
}
buffer_size = atoi(argv[1]);
user_num = atoi(argv[2]);
struct buff_ctrl *buff = (struct buff_ctrl*)malloc(user_num * sizeof(struct buff_ctrl));
for(int i=0; i<user_num; i++)
{
struct buff_ctrl* curr_buff = (buff + (i*sizeof(struct buff_ctrl)));
struct tuple *ptr = (struct tuple*)malloc(buffer_size * sizeof(struct tuple));
curr_buff->buffer_ptr = ptr;//points to another array
curr_buff->in = 8;
curr_buff->out = 4;
curr_buff->numItems = 7;
curr_buff->done = 0;
printf("%p\n",curr_buff);
}
Then, I need to pass the 'buff' pointer as an argument when creating thread using pthread_create:
pthread_create(&mapThd, NULL, mapper, (void*)buff);
pthread_join(mapThd, &status);
free(buff);
/*end of main*/
My function pointer is as follows:
void* mapper(void *buff)
{
struct buff_ctrl* arr = (struct buff_ctrl *)buff;
struct buff_ctrl* temp_ptr;
printf("######################################################\n");
for(int k=0; k<user_num; k++)
{
/*Printing just to check values */
temp_ptr = arr + (k*sizeof(struct buff_ctrl));
printf("buffer ptr = %p\n", temp_ptr->buffer_ptr);
printf("in = %d\n", temp_ptr->in);
printf("out = %d\n", temp_ptr->out);
printf("numItems = %d\n", temp_ptr->numItems);
}
printf("######################################################\n");
pthread_exit((void*)buff);
}
But, when I print the values of 'buffer_ptr' from the created thread (only one), for ODD number of user_num, there is always ONE element of the array 'buff' which gives garbage value after pthread_create statement! When the values are checked in main itself after removing calls to pthread, it runs fine.
This line
struct buff_ctrl* curr_buff = (buff + (i*sizeof(struct buff_ctrl)));
should be
struct buff_ctrl* curr_buff = buff + i;
buff + i is pointer arithmetic and the compiler already takes the size of the
object pointed to by buff into consideration. By doing i*sizeof(struct buff_ctrl) you are assigning
a pointer that may be after the allocated memory.
As general suggestion:
Don't cast malloc. And instead of using sizeof(<type>), use sizeof *variable, this is more safe, because
it's easier to make mistakes when writing sizeof(<type>).
So:
struct buff_ctrl *buff = malloc(user_num * sizeof *buff);
...
struct tuple *ptr = malloc(buffer_size * sizeof *ptr);
And you don't need to declare a separate pointer, you can do:
for(int i=0; i<user_num; i++)
{
buff[i].buffer_ptr = malloc(buffer_size * sizeof *buff[i].buffer_ptr);
buff[i].in = 8;
buff[i].out = 4;
buff[i].numItems = 7;
buff[i].done = 0;
}
Also you should always check for the return value of malloc. If it returns
NULL, you cannot access that memory.
This is wrong:
struct buff_ctrl* curr_buff = (buff + (i*sizeof(struct buff_ctrl)));
When you do pointer arithmetic, it operates in units of the size of what the pointer points to, so you don't need to multiply by sizeof. As a result, you're effectively multiplying twice and accessing outside the array bounds.
Just treat buff as an array, rather than dealing with pointers.
for(int i=0; i<user_num; i++)
{
struct tuple *ptr = malloc(buffer_size * sizeof(struct tuple));
buff[i].buffer_ptr = ptr;//points to another array
buff[i].in = 8;
buff[i].out = 4;
buff[i].numItems = 7;
buff[i].done = 0;
}
Also, see Do I cast the result of malloc?
You have a fundamental error.
Pointer arithmetics works by adding the offset in multiples of the pointer type, so adding the offset yourself will not work as you apparently expect it to.
If it was a char * pointer then you would need to add the offset manually, increments would be multiplied by one. But in your case increments by n are multiplied by the size of the pointer base type.
There are times when doing pointer arithmetics with the addition notation makes sense, but most of the time it's much clearer to write index notation instead.

Function to modify dynamically allocated two dimensional array of char*

So, here's my logic:
This is some text:
char *text;
Then this is array of texts:
char **arr;
Then array of these arrays is:
char ***arr2d;
And if I want a function to modify it, it needs to accept it as:
char ****arr2d;
And within the function use it as:
*arr2d = (e.g. allocate);
So if I want to create 2D array like this and make the first row, first column contain just a letter 'a', then why does this not work?
#define COLUMNS 7
void loadTable(char ****table)
{
*table = (char ***) malloc(sizeof(char**));
if (!*table) {
printf("Allocation error for table rows.");
return;
}
*table[0] = (char**) malloc(COLUMNS * sizeof(char*));
if (!*table[0]) {
printf("Allocation error for table columns.");
return;
}
*table[0][0] = (char*) malloc(2 * sizeof(char));
*table[0][0][0] = (char)(97);
*table[0][0][1] = '\0';
}
int main()
{
char ***table;
loadTable(&table);
return 0;
}
You would need only 3 *** to do what you describe, not 4 ****. Be aware, there are methods to allow you to avoid excessive depth in terms of arrays of arrays of strings. And there are also good reasons to avoid excessively deep orders of arrays, not the least is the need to free(.) everything you allocate. That means exactly one call to free(.) for each and every call to [m][c][re]alloc(.).
But to address your question...
In general, to create new memory for a single array of a previously allocated memory, you could use a function prototyped as:
char * ReSizeBuffer(char **str, size_t origSize);
Where if say the previously allocated buffer were created as:
char *buf = calloc(origSize, 1);
...the usage could look like:
char *tmp = {0};
tmp = ReSizeBuffer(&buf, newSize); //see implementation below
if(!tmp)
{
free(buf);
return NULL;
}
buf = tmp;
///use new buf
...
Then if this works for a single array of char, then the prototype for allocating new memory for a previously allocated array of strings might look like this:
char ** ReSizeBuffer(char ***str, size_t numArrays, size_t strLens);
Where if say the previously allocated 2D buffer were created as:
char **buf = Create2DStr(size_t numStrings, size_t maxStrLen); //see implementation below
...the usage could look like:
char **tmp = {0};
tmp = ReSizeBuffer(&buf, numStrings, maxStrLen);
if(!tmp)
{
free(buf);
return NULL;
}
buf = tmp;
///use new buf
...
Implementations:
Implementation of ReSizeBuffer. This must be expanded if you desire to implement the second prototype:
char * ReSizeBuffer(char **str, size_t size)
{
char *tmp={0};
if(!(*str)) return NULL;
if(size == 0)
{
free(*str);
return NULL;
}
tmp = (char *)realloc((char *)(*str), size);
if(!tmp)
{
free(*str);
return NULL;
}
*str = tmp;
return *str;
}
Implementation of Create2DStr might look like this:
char ** Create2DStr(size_t numStrings, size_t maxStrLen)
{
int i;
char **a = {0};
a = calloc(numStrings, sizeof(char *));
for(i=0;i<numStrings; i++)
{
a[i] = calloc(maxStrLen + 1, 1);
}
return a;
}
I just stumbled upon this old question of mine and spotted the problem immediately. Here is the answer:
The number of asterisks is actually correct, the problem is operator evaluation. Specifically, all lines of code of this form:
*table[0]
should have been written as:
(*table)[0]

C - assigning a true int value to void pointer instead of address/pointer value?

I'm having to deal with a generalised linked list so I cannot just turn the data format from a void * to an int.
Miniscule version:
int main(int argc, char **argv) {
void *data;
int i = 100;
*((int*)data) = i;
printf("%d", (int)data);
return 0;
}
Keeps printing an address. Likewise, data = &i also returns an address. data = i just results in an error. I've tried all that I can and just cannot insert the value i into data.
You need to make data point to a valid memory address first:
int main(int argc, char **argv) {
void *data = malloc(sizeof (int));
int i = 100;
*((int*)data) = i;
printf("%d", *((int*)data));
return 0;
}
Without that malloc(), double undefined behaviour(accessing an uninitialised object && writing data to a random address) will be invoked.
Also, change (int)data to *((int*)data) in your printf() statement. If sizeof (int) > sizeof (void *), data will be truncated when being cast.
If you need to use a void * as a generalised container.
Got two options for integer or other data types
void * data = malloc(sizeof(DATATYPE)); // Datatype can be int in this case
Then
*((int *)data) = SOME VALUE;
Then free it at some point
Otherwise one can usually assume an internet "fits" into a void *.
I would not go down this avenue.

Resources