typedef struct Oft{
int mode;
int refCount;
} OFT;
typedef struct proc{
struct proc *next;
int uss, usp;
int pid; // add pid for identify the proc
int status; // status = FREE|READY|RUNNING|SLEEP|ZOMBIE
int ppid; // parent pid
OFT *fd[10];
int kstack[1024]; // per proc stack area
}PROC;
How would I initialize and use my *fd[10] variable?
assume that I have
PROC *p;
Is this the correct way to initialize its *fd[10]?
for(i = 0; i < 10; i++)
{
p->fd[i] = (OFT *) malloc (sizeof(OFT));
(*p->fd)[0] = Some OFT object?
}
why is p->fd[i] always equal to null when I do the following checking?
if (p->fd[i] == NULL)
//Do sometiong
p->fd[i] = malloc(sizeof(OFT));
is correct, as long as you've provided space for p to point to, by using malloc() or by making it point to some PROC variable. Note you don't need to cast, since malloc() returns a void * which is cast to any type of pointer automatically. You should, however, check if malloc() returns NULL.
(*p->fd)[0]
is wrong and will result in a compiler error. If you have an OFT object named myoft; you can assign it just like you did with malloc; of course, since fd[x] is a pointer, you want to have the address of the object:
p->fd[x] = &myoft;
If you want to access one of the components of one of your OFTs, you could, for example, use
p->fd[x]->refCount++;
I can't answer the last question, why if (p->fd[i] == NULL) is always true, unless you provide a complete example of your code.
Related
I'm trying to build a structure called PROCESS in C, this struct should contain the ID(id) and waiting time (wt) of the process.
typedef struct PROC{
int id;
int wt;
}PROCESS;
PROCESS *pt = NULL;
Now I want to make more then one instance of this struct like an array.
what I want to do is something like this':
PROCESS pt[10];
pt[0].id = 5;
pt[1].id = 7;
But I want to do it using dynamic memory allocation:
pt = calloc(2,sizeof(PROCESS));
pt[0]->id = 5;
What is my mistake?
pt is a pointer to PROCESS, pt[0] is the first PROCESS object pointed to by pt.
The -> operator to access members of a struct must be used with pointers only, otherwise use .
pt[0].id = 5;
would be correct.1
An since you say you are doing C, you don't need to cast malloc or calloc.
PROCESS *pt = calloc(2, sizeof *pt);
if(pt == NULL)
{
// errror handling
// do not continue
}
pt[0].id = 5;
pt[1].id = 7;
Also don't forget to check the return value of calloc and don't forget to free
the memory later with free(pt);.
Fotenotes
1Note that this would be equivalent to
pt->id = 5;
but if you want to set id of the second element, you would need to do
(pt+1)->id = 7;
but I think it's more readable to do
pt[1].id = 7;
typedef struct process{
int id;
int wt;
}processes;
I would allocate like this->
int numberOfDynamicStructs=2;
processes* myProcesses= calloc(numberOfDynamicStructs,sizeof(processes));
Write->
myProcesses[0].id=1;
myProcesses[1].id=2;
Read->
printf("%d %d",myProcesses[0].id,myProcesses[1].id);
Free when done..
/A
I've done some research and couldn't find any answer to my problem.
I'm having problems with freeing my struct.
This is how i create my struct:
struct Structure * newStructure(int N)
{
struct Structure * structure;
int i;
structure = (struct Structure * ) malloc(N * sizeof(struct Structure));
for (i = 0; i < N; i++)
{
structure[i].i_Number = (int * ) malloc(sizeof(int));
structure[i].c_Char = (char * ) malloc(sizeof(char));
structure[i].c_Char[0] = '\0';
structure[i].d_Float = (double * ) malloc(sizeof(double));
}
return structure;
}
Everything works to this point. Later I fill every variable with random values so that they are not empty.
I call my freeMemory function like this freeMemory(structure, amountOfStructures);
And here is freeMemory function itself:
void freeMemory (struct Structure* structure, int N)
{
int i;
for( i=0 ; i<N ; i++ )
{
if (structure[i].i_Number!=NULL) free(structure[i].i_Number);
if (structure[i].c_Char!=NULL) free(structure[i].c_Char);
if (structure[i].d_Float!=NULL) free(structure[i].d_Float);
}
free(structure);
}
The free(structure) part works fine. But there are problems with the for loop and I have no idea what I'm doing wrong here.
#EDIT
I'm adding my struct declaration:
struct Structure{
int *i_Number;
char *c_Char;
double *d_Float;
};
#EDIT2
That's the function that initializes struct:
struct Structure* randomizing (int N)
{
struct Structure* structure = newStructure(N); int i;
srand(time(NULL));
for (i = 0; i < N; i++)
{
int _i; char _c; double _d;
_i = rand()%1000000;
_c = "ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ" [rand () % 26];
_d = 0;
setStructureNumber(structure, i,(int*) _i);
setStructureChar(structure, i, (char*) _c);
setStructureDouble(structure, i, &_d);
// I'VE COMMENTED OUT THE MUTATORS ABOVE AND THE ERROR DOES NOT SHOW ANYMORE, SO THERES SOMETHING WRONG WITH THEM
}
return structure;
}
And im calling it like this:
struct Structure* structure;
structure = randomizing(amountOfStructures);
The mutators used:
// Mutators
void setStructureNumber (struct Structure* structure, int p, int* num)
{
if (structure[p].i_Number != NULL) free(structure[p].i_Number);
structure[p].i_Number = (int*) malloc (sizeof(int));
structure[p].i_Number = num;
}
void setStructureChar (struct Structure* structure, int p, char* str)
{
if (structure[p].c_Char != NULL) free(structure[p].c_Char);
structure[p].c_Char = (char*) malloc (sizeof(char));
structure[p].c_Char = str;
}
void setStructureDouble (struct Structure* structure, int p, double* dou)
{
if (structure[p].d_Float != NULL) free(structure[p].d_Float);
structure[p].d_Float = (double*) malloc (sizeof(double));
structure[p].d_Float = dou;
}
The most likely reason is that somewhere in your code you go out of bounds of the memory you allocated and thus destroy the integrity of the heap. A frequently encountered practical manifestation of such undefined behavior is a failure at free, when the library detects the problem with the heap.
Inside you allocation cycle you allocate just one object of each respective type for each field of your struct object. For example, you allocate only one character for c_Char field and initialize it with \0. This might suggest that c_Char is intended to hold a string (is it?). If so, then the memory you allocated is sufficient for an empty string only. If you do not reallocate that memory later, any attempts to place a longer string into that memory will break the integrity of the heap and trigger undefined behavior.
The same applies to other fields as well. However, without extra explanations from you it is not possible to say whether it is right or wrong. At least, you have to provide the definition of struct Structure. And you have to explain your intent. Why are you dynamically allocating single-object memory for struct fields instead of just making these objects immediate members of the struct?
The additional code you posted is completely and utterly broken.
Firstly you are calling your mutators as
setStructureNumber(structure, i,(int*) _i);
setStructureChar(structure, i, (char*) _c);
setStructureDouble(structure, i, &_d);
This does not make any sense. Why are you trying to convert integer value _i to pointer type??? If you want to obtain a pointer to _i, it is done as &_i. You already do it correctly in the very last call, where you pass &_d. Why are the first two calls different from the last one? What was your logic behind this?
Secondly, inside your mutator functions
void setStructureNumber (struct Structure* structure, int p, int* num)
{
if (structure[p].i_Number != NULL) free(structure[p].i_Number);
structure[p].i_Number = (int*) malloc (sizeof(int));
structure[p].i_Number = num;
}
you are freeing old memory and allocating new memory. Why? Why don't just reuse the old memory to store the new value? (BTW, there's no need to check the pointer for null before calling free, because free will check it internally anyway.)
Thirdly, after allocating the new memory you immediately leak it by overriding the pointer value returned by malloc with the pointer value passed from the outside
structure[p].i_Number = num;
Again, this does not make any sense. This is actually what causes the crash on free - the pointers you pass from the outside are either meaningless random values (like your (int *) _i or (char *) _c)) or point to a local variable (like your &_d).
There's no way to "correct" your code without knowing what it is you are trying to do in the first place. There are just too many completely unnecessary memory allocations and reallocations and other illogical things. I would simply rewrite the mutator functions as
void setStructureNumber (struct Structure* structure, int p, int num)
{
*structure[p].i_Number = num;
}
Note - no memory reallocations and the argument is passed by value.
The functions would be called as
setStructureNumber(structure, i, _i);
setStructureChar(structure, i, _c);
setStructureDouble(structure, i, _d);
But again, this is so vastly different from what you have that I don't know whether this is what you need.
Technically, there is nothing wrong with what you are doing (except the missing error checks on allocations, unnecessary casts of malloc results, and unnecessary NULL checking before calling free).
This should work fine, assuming that you pass the correct value of N, and that you do not free things more than once:
struct Structure * newStructure(int N) {
struct Structure * structure = malloc(N * sizeof(struct Structure));
for (int i = 0; i < N; i++) {
structure[i].i_Number = malloc(sizeof(int));
structure[i].c_Char = malloc(sizeof(char));
structure[i].c_Char[0] = '\0';
structure[i].d_Float = malloc(sizeof(double));
}
return structure;
}
void freeMemory (struct Structure* structure, int N)
{
for(int i=0 ; i<N ; i++ )
{
free(structure[i].i_Number);
free(structure[i].c_Char);
free(structure[i].d_Float);
}
free(structure);
}
You can use a memory diagnostic tool such as valgrind to ensure that you do not freeing things more than once.
In your mutators you leak memory and then point to local variables (comments mine)
void setStructureChar (struct Structure* structure, int p, char* str)
{
if (structure[p].c_Char != NULL) free(structure[p].c_Char);
// allocates new memory and points c_Char at it.
structure[p].c_Char = (char*) malloc (sizeof(char));
// makes c_Char point to where `str` is pointing; now the allocated memory is leaked
structure[p].c_Char = str;
}
When you later do free on structure[p].c_Char, it causes undefined behaviour because you called this function with a pointer to a local variable. You probably have undefined behaviour elsewhere too if you try to access c_Char anywhere before freeing it.
The other mutators have the same problem.
To "fix" this change structure[p].c_Char = str; to *structure[p].c_Char = *str;.
You also have blunders here:
setStructureNumber(structure, i,(int*) _i);
setStructureChar(structure, i, (char*) _c);
You meant &_i and &_c respectively. I would advise to remove all casts from your code. At best they are redundant; at worst (e.g. in these two lines) they hide an error which the compiler would diagnose.
Also remove all the NULL checks before free, they are redundant and make your code hard to read. Instead, do the NULL checks after calling malloc, and abort the program if malloc returned NULL.
However this whole setup seems like a ghastly design. You could pass the things by value to the mutators. And you could change your struct to not contain pointers, and therefore not need all this extra allocation.
for instance this code:
struct test{
int ID;
bool start;
};
struct test * sTest;
void changePointer(struct test * t)
{
t->ID = 3;
t->start = false;
}
int main(void)
{
sTest->ID = 5;
sTest->start = true;
changePointer(sTest);
return 0;
}
If I was to execute this code, then what would the output be? (i.e. if I pass a pointer like this, does it change the reference or is it just a copy?)
Thanks in advance!
Your program doesn't have any output, so there would be none.
It also never initializes the sTest pointer to point at some valid memory, so the results are totally undefined. This program invokes undefined behavior, and should/might/could crash when run.
IF the pointer had been initialized to point at a valid object of type struct test, the fields of that structure would have been changed so that at the end of main(), ID would be 3. The changes done inside changePointer() are done on the same memory as the changes done in main().
An easy fix would be:
int main(void)
{
struct test aTest;
sTest = &aTest; /* Notice the ampersand! */
sTest->start = true;
changePointer(sTest);
return 0;
}
Also note that C before C99 doesn't have a true keyword.
The only question is why do you need a test pointer in a global name space? Second is that you do not have any memory allocation operations. And you have a pointer as an input parameter of your function. Therefore structure where it points to will be changed in "changePointer".
1) First thing your code will crash since you are not allocating memory for saving structure.. you might need to add
sText = malloc(sizeof(struct test));
2) After correcting the crash, you can pass structure pointer and the changes you make in changePointer function will reflect in main and vizeversa..
3) But since you are not printing anything, there wont be any output to your program..
typedef struct Model
{
int recordId;
char *name;
}Model;
typedef struct ModelArray
{
//keeps the size that the array was initially create with. When more elements are needed
//we use this to add that many more elements
int originalSize;
//total number of elements that can be used
int elements;
//total number of elements used
int count;
//the actual array is stored here
Model *source;
}ModelArray;
void initModelArray(ModelArray *array, int numberOfElements)
{
array->originalSize = numberOfElements;
array->elements = numberOfElements;
array->count = 0;
array->source = malloc(sizeof(Model)*numberOfElements);//0 bytes in 3 blocks are definitely lost in loss record 1 of 65
}
void deallocModelArray(ModelArray *array)
{
if(array == NULL)
return;
array->elements = 0;
array->count = 0;
free(array->source);
array->source = NULL;
free(array);
}
main(int argc, const char * argv[])
{
ModelArray *models = malloc(sizeof(ModelArray));
initModelArray(models, 10);
deallocModelArray(models);
}
What is lost? Code looks fine to me. I'm sure I could say array->source = NULL first but it's not needed, right?
To deallocate these structures correctly, you need to do the following, in this order:
free(models->source);
free(models);
If you do anything else, you're leaking memory.
Edit:
OK, having seen the Model struct, you're probably leaking the names, or at least valgrind thinks you do because you deallocate the ModelArray structure, which contains a pointer to a Model structure, which contains a char* which you don't free first.
So:
int i;
for( i=0; i<models->originalSize; i++ ) {
if( models->source[i]->name != NULL ) {
free( models->source[i]->name );
}
}
free(models->source);
free(models);
And it would be a good idea to use calloc() instead of malloc() when allocating models->source in the first place. This will set all the name pointers to 0. Without this, the test for models->source[i]->name being non-NULL above might fail if name happens to contain some garbage (since using uninitialized memory produces undefined behavior.)
Er... Yes, the memory is lost. Of course, it is lost, since you "left out dealloc code"!
How could you possibly expect anyone to answer your question when you "left out dealloc code"? The very essence of your question is whether your dealloc code is correct or not. And you decided to leave it out?
On top of that, there quite a few thing that make little sense in your code. What is
typedef struct ModelArray {
...
Model *source;
...
} Model;
supposed to mean? Why are you typedefing struct ModelArray as Model? In fact, your code will not even compile, since Model * is used inside the struct, where it is not declared yet. You also use ModelArray type in your code, while in reality there's no such type. You have struct ModelArray, but not just ModelArray. The code you posted is not real code. Post real code, please. (Apparently it was supposed to be typedef struct ModelArray { ... } ModelArray; with Model defined elsewhere.)
Finally, as an unrelated note, // comments is a C99 feature. In C99 the function return type cannot be omitted (no "implicit int" rule in C99), meaning that you have to declare your main function as int main.
I have a pointer to a structure and I'd like to fetch all of its members by trial and error. I'm trying to run through the structure by incrementing the pointer by one and derefencing it. It should return a correct value from the structure (every i*sizeof(int) time) but it doesn't.
What am I doing wrong?
fn (mach_msg_header_t *InHeadP, mach_msg_header_t *OutHeadP)
{
/*
assume that all struct members are int types
typedef struct
{
mach_msg_bits_t msgh_bits;
mach_msg_size_t msgh_size;
mach_port_t msgh_remote_port;
mach_port_t msgh_local_port;
mach_msg_size_t msgh_reserved;
mach_msg_id_t msgh_id;
} mach_msg_header_t;
size of the struct is 24.
*/
printf("ID: %d \n",InHeadP->msgh_id); //prints 'ID: 1337'
printf("Ptr: %p\n",InHeadP);
for (int i = 0; i <= 24; i++)
{
int deref = *((int*)(InHeadP+i));
printf("InHeadP[%d]=%d\n",i,deref);
//no sign of 1337 anywhere
}
}
P.S. I know that I shouldn't be doing that, but this is only for testing purposes.
Because InHeadP is a mach_msg_header_t*, adding an integer to it will actually add that integer times sizeof(mach_msg_header_t), as though you were indexing an array of mach_msg_header_ts (and is actually how array indexing works). You need to cast InHeadP to an int* before performing arithmetic on it, and even then, as the struct has six fields, i should only go up to 6, not 24.
A preferred method to iterate through a structure is to create a function that returns the value or address of the field given an index. Note that if the order of the members in the struct changes, this function must change too:
int * Index_Of(unsigned int index, mach_msg_header_t * p_struct)
{
switch (index)
{
case 0: return (int *) &(p_struct->msgh_bits);
case 1: return (int *) &(p_struct->msgh_size);
case 2: return (int *) &(p_struct->msgh_remote_port);
case 3: return (int *) &(p_struct->msgh_local_port);
case 4: return (int *) &(p_struct->msgh_reserved);
case 5: return (int *) &(p_struct->msgh_id);
}
return 0;
}
Just remember that treating the structure as contiguous fields (members) is not advisable since the compiler is allowed to add padding between structure members. Thus any method to access the fields except by name, is dangerous and will lead to very difficult bugs.
BTW, treating each field as an int is also dangerous. If any of the types is changed to something else, like a double, your code will break. Compiler will not catch the error because casting tells the compiler YOU know what you are doing.
You could "turn the picture around" and implement a Visitor pattern:
struct Visitor_Void
{
void (*fn_msgh_bits)(mach_msg_bits_t);
void (*fn_msgh_size)(mach_msg_size_t);
void (*fn_msgh_remote_port)(mach_port_t);
void (*fn_msgh_local_port)(mach_port_t);
void (*fn_msgh_reserved)(mach_msg_size_t);
void (*fn_msgh_id)(mach_msg_id_t);
};
void Visit_Members(mach_msg_header_t * p_header,
struct Visitor_Void * p_visitor)
{
(p_visitor->fn_msgh_bits)(p_header->msgh_bits);
(p_visitor->fn_msgh_size)(p_header->msgh_size);
(p_visitor->fn_msgh_remote_port)(p_header->msgh_remote_port);
(p_visitor->fn_msgh_local_port)(p_header->msgh_local_port);
(p_visitor->fn_msgh_reserved)(p_header->msgh_reserved);
(p_visitor->fn_msgh_id)(p_header->msgh_id);
return;
}
No, you shouldn't be doing this!
What is particularly wrong here
for (int i = 0; i <= 24; i++)
{
int deref = *((int*)(InHeadP+i));
printf("InHeadP[%d]=%d\n",i,deref);
}
is that you print the first int of 24 different structs.
When you call (int*)(InHeadP+i) you are doing pointer arithmetic on mach_msg_header_t which is size 24. So your first iteration is at the beginning of the struct, and your second iteration is right after your struct. You are accessing some other memory.
Try (((int*)InHeadP)+i).
Wait a second, this is wrong:
int deref = *((int*)(InHeadP+i));
You want
int deref == *((int*)InHeadP+i)
You skipping 24 bytes each time through the loop, rather than 4.