cJSON memory leak is a post where a memory leak occured. But the problem n this case is the cJSON_Print() function.
I did not even use this function (have commented it for the time being) and have still a memory leakage. My ode looks like this
void myFunc(cJSON* ptr)
{
/*some code */
// I have used some sint32 numbers from another library for simplicity
// i will use int
int num = 30
cJSON_AddItemToArray(pt_data,cJSON_CreateNumber(num));
}
int main()
{
cJSON *root =cJSON_CreateObject();
cJSON *pt_PPC= cJSON_CreateArray();
cJSON_AddItemToObject(root,"PowerPC",pt_PPC);
cJSON *pt_data = cJSON_CreateArray();
cJSON_AddItemToArray(pt_PPC,pt_data);
int i;
for(i=0;i<10;i++)
myFunc(pt_PPC);
cJSON_Delete(root);
return 0;
}
The memory increases with time.
Any suggestions?
I've tried your code in VS2015 and found that your myFunc function does not even compile! The function cJSON_AddItemToObject takes three parameters and num is not even defined.
I tried with the following code:
#define _CRTDBG_MAP_ALLOC
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <crtdbg.h>
#include "cJSON.h"
void myFunc(cJSON* ptr)
{
/*some code */
cJSON_AddItemToObject(ptr, "Item", cJSON_CreateNumber(10.0));
}
int main()
{
cJSON *root = cJSON_CreateObject();
cJSON *pt_PPC = cJSON_CreateObject();
cJSON_AddItemToObject(root, "PowerPC", pt_PPC);
myFunc(pt_PPC);
cJSON_Delete(root);
_CrtDumpMemoryLeaks();
}
I enabled memory leak debugging (Link to Article) and used _CrtDumpMemoryLeaks() to print the possible memory leaks if any (to the debug output window).
There were no memory leaks detected.
Your code is not complete and has syntax errors so it's not possible to tell where the problem exactly is by looking at it.
Anyway it's most likely you're creating a JSON object (somewhere) and forgetting to add it to the root object or any of its descendants. When the root object is deleted the un-connected elements are not deleted and leaks memory.
Hope this helps.
I have found the problem. The problem is still somehow in the cJSON lib. Inside a function i am doing something like this.
uint8 *arr;
arr = (uint8 *)malloc(t_DataVariableInfo.s32_Size);
getvariables(&arr); // this function gets some variables from a datapool
//pt_data is the pointer of cJSON where this number has to be added
cJSON_AddItemToArray(pt_data,cJSON_CreateNumber(arr[i]));
free(arr);
Now because of some reason arr could not be freed. The cJSON_CreateNumber() function is maybe doing some changes in it. I got it to work by doing this
uint8 *arr;
arr = (uint8 *)malloc(t_DataVariableInfo.s32_Size);
uint8 *address = arr;
getvariables(&arr); // this function gets some variables from a datapool
//pt_data is the pointer of cJSON where this number has to be added
cJSON_AddItemToArray(pt_data,cJSON_CreateNumber(arr[i]));
free(address);
Thanks for the help. Sorry i could not post all the code. Is this a problem of cJSON_CreateNumber()??
Related
I am using json-c library to send json-object to client.And I notice there is no native function to release the memory which json_object_to_json_string allocate.Does the library release it automaticlly? OR I have to "free(str)" to avoid memory leak?
I tried to read its source code but it makes me unconscious...So anybody know this?
It seems that you don't need to free it manually.
I see that this buffer comes from within the json_object (see the last line of this function):
const char* json_object_to_json_string_ext(struct json_object *jso, int flags)
{
if (!jso)
return "null";
if ((!jso->_pb) && !(jso->_pb = printbuf_new()))
return NULL;
printbuf_reset(jso->_pb);
if(jso->_to_json_string(jso, jso->_pb, 0, flags) < 0)
return NULL;
return jso->_pb->buf;
}
The delete function frees this buffer:
static void json_object_generic_delete(struct json_object* jso)
{
#ifdef REFCOUNT_DEBUG
MC_DEBUG("json_object_delete_%s: %p\n",
json_type_to_name(jso->o_type), jso);
lh_table_delete(json_object_table, jso);
#endif /* REFCOUNT_DEBUG */
printbuf_free(jso->_pb);
free(jso);
}
It is important to understand that this buffer is only valid while the object is valid. If the object reaches 0 reference count, the string is also freed and if you are using it after it is freed the results are unpredictable.
I would like to create a wrapper for c functions, so that I can convert a function call of the form ret = function(arg1,arg2,arg3); into the form /*void*/ function_wrapper(/*void*/);. That is similar to function objects in C++ and boost bind.
Is this possible? how can I do it?
Update:
To explain in more details what I am looking for:
We start with this function:
int f(int i){
//do stuff
return somevalue;
}
Obvioulsy, it is called like this:
// do stuff
int x = 0;
ret = f(0);
// do more stuff.
I would like to do some magic that will wrap the function into void function(void)
struct function_object fo;
fo.function_pointer = &f;
fo.add_arg(x, int);
fo.set_ret_pointer(&ret);
fo.call();
Note: I saw that there was a vote for closing this question and marking it as unclear. Please do not do that. I have a legitimate need to get this question answered. If you need explanation, ask and I will be glad to elaborate.
I came up with a better code that might allow you to do what you want. First I'll explain how it works, show the code and explain why I still don't think it's a good idea to use it (though the code might open doors for improvements that addresses those issues).
Functionality:
Before you start using the "function objects", you have to call an initialization function (FUNCTIONOBJ_initialize();), which will initialize the mutexes on every data structure used in the library.
After initializing, every time you want to call one of those "function objects", without using the parameters, you will have to set it up first. This is done by creating a FUNCTIONOBJ_handler_t pointer and calling get_function_handler(). This will search for a free FUNCTIONOBJ_handler data structure that can be used at the moment.
If none is found (all FUNCTIONOBJ_handler data structures are busy, being used by some function call) NULL is returned.
If get_function_handler() does find a FUNCTIONOBJ_handler data structure it will try to lock the FUNCTIONOBJ_id_holder data structure, that holds the ID of the FUNCTIONOBJ_handler of the function about to be called.
If FUNCTIONOBJ_id_holder is locked already, get_function_handler() will hang until it's unlocked by the thread using it.
Once FUNCTIONOBJ_id_holder is locked, the ID of the grabbed FUNCTIONOBJ_handler is wrote on it and the FUNCTIONOBJ_handler pointer is returned by get_function_handler.
With the pointer in hand, the user can set the pointer to the arguments and the return variable with set_args_pointer and set_return_pointer, which both take a void * as arguments.
Finally, you can call the function you want. It has to:
1 - Grab the FUNCTIONOBJ_handler ID from the FUNCTIONOBJ_id_holder data structure and use it to get a pointer to the FUNCTIONOBJ_handler itself.
2 - Use the FUNCTIONOBJ_handler to access the arguments.
3 - Return by using one of the return function (on the example we have ret_int, which will return an integer and unlock the FUNCTIONOBJ_handler)
Below is a simplified mind map describing a bit of what is going on:
Finally, the code:
funcobj.h:
#include <stdio.h>
#include <pthread.h>
#define MAX_SIMULTANEOUS_CALLS 1024
typedef struct {
//Current ID about to be called
int current_id;
//Mutex
pthread_mutex_t id_holder_mutex;
} FUNCTIONOBJ_id_holder_t;
typedef struct {
//Attributes
void *arguments;
void *return_pointer;
//Mutex
pthread_mutex_t handler_mutex;
} FUNCTIONOBJ_handler_t;
FUNCTIONOBJ_handler_t FUNCTIONOBJ_handler[MAX_SIMULTANEOUS_CALLS];
FUNCTIONOBJ_id_holder_t FUNCTIONOBJ_id_holder;
void set_return_pointer(FUNCTIONOBJ_handler_t *this, void *pointer);
void set_args_pointer(FUNCTIONOBJ_handler_t *this, void *pointer);
void ret_int(FUNCTIONOBJ_handler_t *this, int return_value);
void FUNCTIONOBJ_initialize(void);
FUNCTIONOBJ_handler_t *get_function_handler(void);
funcobj.c:
#include "funcobj.h"
void set_return_pointer(FUNCTIONOBJ_handler_t *this, void *pointer){
this->return_pointer = pointer;
}
void set_args_pointer(FUNCTIONOBJ_handler_t *this, void *pointer){
this->arguments = pointer;
}
void ret_int(FUNCTIONOBJ_handler_t *this, int return_value){
if(this->return_pointer){
*((int *) (this->return_pointer)) = return_value;
}
pthread_mutex_unlock(&(this->handler_mutex));
}
void FUNCTIONOBJ_initialize(void){
for(int i = 0; i < MAX_SIMULTANEOUS_CALLS; ++i){
pthread_mutex_init(&FUNCTIONOBJ_handler[i].handler_mutex, NULL);
}
pthread_mutex_init(&FUNCTIONOBJ_id_holder.id_holder_mutex, NULL);
}
FUNCTIONOBJ_handler_t *get_function_handler(void){
int i = 0;
while((0 != pthread_mutex_trylock(&FUNCTIONOBJ_handler[i].handler_mutex)) && (i < MAX_SIMULTANEOUS_CALLS)){
++i;
}
if(i >= MAX_SIMULTANEOUS_CALLS){
return NULL;
}
//Sets the ID holder to hold this ID until the function is called
pthread_mutex_lock(&FUNCTIONOBJ_id_holder.id_holder_mutex);
FUNCTIONOBJ_id_holder.current_id = i;
return &FUNCTIONOBJ_handler[i];
}
main.c:
#include "funcobj.h"
#include <string.h>
//Function:
void print(void){
//First the function must grab the handler that contains all its attributes:
//The FUNCTIONOBJ_id_holder is mutex locked, so we can just access its value and
//then free the lock:
FUNCTIONOBJ_handler_t *this = &FUNCTIONOBJ_handler[FUNCTIONOBJ_id_holder.current_id];
//We dont need the id_holder anymore, free it!
pthread_mutex_unlock(&FUNCTIONOBJ_id_holder.id_holder_mutex);
//Do whatever the function has to do
printf("%s\n", (char *) this->arguments);
//Return the value to the pointed variable using the function that returns an int
ret_int(this, 0);
}
void *thread_entry_point(void *data){
int id = (int) data;
char string[100];
snprintf(string, 100, "Thread %u", id);
int return_val;
FUNCTIONOBJ_handler_t *this;
for(int i = 0; i < 200; ++i){
do {
this = get_function_handler();
} while(NULL == this);
set_args_pointer(this, string);
set_return_pointer(this, &return_val);
print();
}
return NULL;
}
int main(int argc, char **argv){
//Initialize global data strucutres (set up mutexes)
FUNCTIONOBJ_initialize();
//testing with 20 threads
pthread_t thread_id[20];
for(int i = 0; i < 20; ++i){
pthread_create(&thread_id[i], NULL, &thread_entry_point, (void *) i);
}
for(int i = 0; i < 20; ++i){
pthread_join(thread_id[i], NULL);
}
return 0;
}
To compile: gcc -o program main.c funcobj.c -lpthread
Reasons to avoid it:
By using this, you are limiting the number of "function objects" that can be running simultaneously. That's because we need to use global data structures to hold the information required by the functions (arguments and return pointer).
You will be seriously slowing down the program when using multiple threads if those use "function objects" frequently: Even though many functions can run at the same time, only a single function object can be set up at a time. So at least for that fraction of time it takes for the program to set up the function and actually call it, all other threads trying to run a function will be hanging waiting the the data structure to be unlocked.
You still have to write some non-intuitive code at the beginning and end of each function you want to work without arguments (grabbing the FUNCTIONOBJ_handler structure, unlocking the FUNCTIONOBJ_id_holder structure, accessing arguments through the pointer you grabbed and returning values with non-built-in functions). This increases the chances of bugs drastically if care is not taken, specially some nasty ones:
Increases the chances of deadlocks. If you forget to unlock one of the data structures in any point of your code, you might end up with a program that works fine at some moments, but randomly freeze completely at others (because all function calls without arguments will be hanging waiting for the lock to be freed). That is a risk that happens on multithreaded programs anyways, but by using this you are increasing the amount of code that requires locks unnecessarily (for style purposes).
Complicates the use of recursive functions: Every time you call the function object you'll have to go through the set up phrase (even when inside another function object). Also, if you call the recursive function enough times to fill all FUNCTIONOBJ_handler structures the program will deadlock.
Amongst other reasons I might not notice at the moment :p
I'm working on INI-style configuration parser for some project, and I gets next trouble.
I have 3 structures:
typedef struct {
const char* name;
unsigned tract;
int channel;
const char* imitation_type;
} module_config;
typedef struct {
int channel_number;
int isWorking;
int frequency;
int moduleCount;
} channel_config;
typedef struct {
int mode;
module_config* module;
channel_config* channel;
} settings;
And I have function for handling data in my INI-file (I working under inih parser): [pasted to pastebin cause too long]. Finally, in main(), I did the next:
settings* main_settings;
main_settings = (settings*)malloc(sizeof(settings));
main_settings->module = (module_config*)malloc(sizeof(module_config));
main_settings->channel = (channel_config*)malloc(sizeof(channel_config));
if (ini_parse("test.ini", handler, &main_settings) < 0) {
printf("Can't load 'test.ini'\n");
return 1;
}
In result, binary crashes with memory fault. I think (no, I KNOW), what I'm incorrectly allocating the memory in handler(), but I does not understand, where I do it wrong. I spent all night long trying to understand memory allocating, and I'm very tired, but now me simply interestingly, what I'm doing wrong, and HOW to force this working fine.
P.S. Sorry for ugly english
The problem seems to be related to the reallocation of your structs:
pconfig = (settings *) realloc(pconfig, (module_count + channel_count) * sizeof(channel_config));
pconfig->module = (module_config *) realloc(pconfig->module, module_count * sizeof(module_config));
pconfig->channel = (channel_config *) realloc(pconfig->channel, channel_count * sizeof(channel_config));
First of all, you must not reallocate the main settings struct. Since your handler will always be called with the original pconfig value, the reallocation of the module and channel arrays has no effect, and you'll access freed memory.
Also when reallocating the module and channel arrays you should allocate count + 1 elements, since the next invocation of handler might assign to the [count] slot.
So try to replace the three lines above with:
pconfig->module = (module_config *) realloc(pconfig->module, (module_count + 1) * sizeof(module_config));
pconfig->channel = (channel_config *) realloc(pconfig->channel, (channel_count + 1) * sizeof(channel_config));
Actually i developing using unit test.
But i break down my code in other form to ask for the error that i faced.
I have these declaration in my header file
typedef struct
{
void *topOfStack;
}Stack;
typedef enum {NUMBER,OPERATOR,IDENTIFIER}Token;
int operatorEvaluate(Stack *numberStack , Stack *operatorStack);
void * pop(Stack *stack);
The following is the respective source file
#include "try.h"
void *pop(Stack *numberStack)
{
Token *newToken = NUMBER;
return newToken;
}
int operatorEvaluate(Stack *numberStack , Stack *operatorStack)
{
Token *first = (Token*)pop (numberStack);
if(numberStack != operatorStack)
{
if(*first == NUMBER)
return 1;
}
return 0;
}
This is the source file that i call the functions which is main
#include "try.h"
#include <stdio.h>
int main ()
{
Stack numberStack;
Stack operatorStack;
int num;
num = operatorEvaluate(&numberStack , &operatorStack);
printf("This is the returned value: %d",num);
return 0;
}
When i tried to compile, the unit test tell me that bad memory access.
So i try to use eclipse to compile these, and windows tells that the .exe had stop working.
Hope someone can help me, i stuck for a long time...
Enable compiler warnings.
In particular, this makes zero sense:
Token *newToken = NUMBER;
That's a pointer, and you're assigning a value.
I cannot propose a fix, as I have no idea what you're doing.
That pop() function isn't touching the stack, and is returning an enum converted to a pointer. If you try to access anything through that pointer, it's going to provoke undefined behavior.
Your pop function is wrong in a few ways. You probably want it to actually pop your stack, rather than return a constant (which it isn't doing either, by the way!)...something like this:
void *pop(Stack *numberStack)
{
return numberStack->topOfStack;
}
but if you do that it'll still crash, because you never initialize your stack OR fill the topOfStack pointer.
/*language C code*/
#include "windows.h"
typedef struct object_s
{
SRWLOCK lock;
int data;
} object_t, *object_p; /*own and pointer type*/
void thread(object_p x)
{
AcquireSRWLockExclusive(&x->lock);
//...do something that could probably change x->data value to 0
if(x->data==0)
free(x);
else
ReleaseSRWLockExclusive(&x->lock);
}
void main()
{
int i;
object_p object=(object_p)malloc(sizeof(object_t));
InitializeSRWLock(&object->lock);
for(i=0;i<3;i++)
CreateThread(0,0,thread,object,0);
}
As you can figure out in the codes above, what I have to accomplish is to let one thread conditionally free the object on which the other two may block. Codes above are obviously flawed because if object is set free along with the lock, all blocking threads give us nowhere but wrong.
A solution below
/*language C code*/
#include "windows.h"
typedef struct object_s
{
/*change: move lock to stack in main()*/
int data;
} object_t, *object_p; /*own and pointer type*/
void thread(void * x)
{
struct {
PSRWLOCK l;
object_p o;
} * _x=x;
AcquireSRWLockExclusive(_x->l);
//...do something that could probably change x->data value to 0
if(_x->o->data==0)
free(_x->o);
ReleaseSRWLockExclusive(&x->lock);
}
void main()
{
int i;
SRWLOCK lock; /*lock over here*/
object_p object=(object_p)malloc(sizeof(object_t));
InitializeSRWLock(&lock);
/*pack for thread context*/
struct
{
PSRWLOCK l;
object_p o;
} context={&lock, object};
for(i=0;i<3;i++)
CreateThread(0,0,thread,&context,0);
}
works in this case but not applicable however, in my final project because there is actually a dynamic linked list of objects. By applying this solution it means that there must be a list of locks accordingly, each lock for an object and moreover, when a certain object is set free, its lock must be set free at the same time. There is nothing new compared with the first code section.
Now I wonder if there is an alternative solution to this. Thank you very much!
The solution is to not allocate the lock together with the data. I would suggest that you move the data out of that struct and replace it with a pointer to the data. Your linked list can then free the data first, and then the node, without any problems. Here's some pseudo code:
typedef struct
{
lock_t lock;
int* data_ptr;
} something_t;
void init_something (something_t* thing, ...)
{
thing->lock = init_lock();
thing->data_ptr = malloc(...); // whatever the data is supposed to be
}
void free_something (somthing_t* thing)
{
lock(thing->lock);
free(thing->data_ptr);
thing->data_ptr = NULL;
unlock(thing->lock);
}
...
void linked_list_delete_node (...)
{
free_something(node_to_delete->thing);
free(node_to_delete);
}
...
void thread (void* x)
{
lock(x->lock);
//...do something that could probably change x->data_ptr->data... to 0
if(x->data_ptr->data == 0)
{
free_something(x->data_ptr->data);
}
unlock(x->lock);
}
AcquireSRWLockExclusive(lock);
if(_x->o->data==0)
free(_x);
ReleaseSRWLockExclusive(lock);
As a sidenote, a C program for Windows can never return void. A hosted C program must always return int. Your program will not compile on a C compiler.
Also, CreateThread() expects a function pointer to a function returning a 32-bit value and taking a void pointer as parameter. You pass a different kind of function pointer, function pointer casts aren't allowed in C, nor am I sure what sort of madness Windows will execute if it gets a different function pointer than what it expects. You invoke undefined behavior. This can cause your program to crash or behave in unexpected or random ways.
You need to change your thread function to DWORD WINAPI thread (LPVOID param);