Unable to find where the memory leak is happening in this code.
Basically I want to write a XS wrapper for a C-function which returns a two-dimensional array.
C-function:
int CW_returnArray(double** arrayDouble, int* count)
{
int number = 10;
int index, index1;
for(index = 0; index < number; index++)
{
for(index1 = 0; index1 < 10000; index1++)
{
arrayDouble[index][index1] = 12.51;
}
count[index] = 10000;
}
return number;
}
array -> output param to hold the two dimensional array
count -> output param to hold the number of element in each 1D array
XS wrapper:
void
returnArray()
PPCODE:
{
/** variable declaration **/
double** array;
int i = 0, j=0, status;
int* count;
int totalArrays;
SV** SVArrays; // to hold the references of 1D arrays
SV** SVtempArray; // temporary array to hold the elements of 1D array
/** allocate memory for C-type variables **/
New(0, array, 10, double*);
for(i = 0; i<10;i++)
{
New(0, array[i], 10000, double);
}
New(0, count, 10, int);
/** call C function **/
status = CW_returnArray(array, count);
/** check the status and retrieve the array to store it in stack **/
if(status > 0)
{
totalArrays = status;
New(0, SVArrays, totalArrays, SV*);
for(i = 0; i<totalArrays; i++)
{
/** allocate memory for temporary SV array **/
New(0, SVtempArray, count[i], SV*);
for(j = 0; j<count[i]; j++)
{
SVtempArray[j] = newSVnv(array[i][j]);
}
/** Make an array (AV) out of temporary SV array and store the reference in SVArrays **/
SVArrays[i] = newRV_noinc((SV*) av_make(count[i], SVtempArray));
/** free the memory allocated for temp SV array **/
for(j = 0; j<count[i]; j++)
{
sv_free(SVtempArray[j]);
}
Safefree(SVtempArray); SVtempArray = NULL;
}
}
else
{
totalArrays = 0;
}
/** push the return values to stack **/
EXTEND(SP, 2);
PUSHs(sv_2mortal(newSViv(status)));
PUSHs(sv_2mortal(newRV_noinc((SV*) av_make(totalArrays, SVArrays))));
/** clean up allocated memory for SV "array of array" , if needed **/
if(totalArrays > 0)
{
Safefree(SVArrays); SVArrays = NULL;
}
/** clean up allocated memory for C-type variables **/
for(i = 0; i<10;i++)
{
Safefree(array[i]);
}
Safefree(array); array = NULL;
Safefree(count); count = NULL;
}
An "array of array" is returned from XS.
testing in Perl script:
for(1..100)
{
my ($status, $arrayref) = returnArray();
undef $status;
$arrayref = [];
system('pause');
}
Every time the function returnArray() is called, the Commit size of Perl process is increasing.
But I would expect that the $arrayref variable should be garbage collected every time and the Memory usage should not increase.
I hope, I am freeing all the allocated memory in XS. But still there is a memory leak.
What is wrong with this XS code for memory leak?
Well, the pattern of "create a template array, do av_make(), then free the template" is not very good -- you'd be much better by simply creating your array with newAV(), av_extend()ing it to the right size, and then doing av_store(newSVnv(...)) for each element. That lets you avoid the intermediate SVtempArray allocations entirely.
However, that's not what you asked about. I think your problem is that you Safefree(SVArrays) without first sv_free()ing each element. Since av_make() duplicates the contents of the source array, AFAICT you're leaking the reference created by
SVArrays[i] = newRV_noinc((SV*) av_make(count[i], SVtempArray));
You'll need to iterate over SVArrays and call sv_free() on each element before you Safefree(SVArrays).
Related
I would like to create a new array of values, and I am not sure how to do this efficiently. Since to create the new array I have to call a function, passing the old array as a parameter. Right now my code looks something like:
float *newMeasurements1;
newMeasurements1 = malloc(sizeof(calcNewArray(oldArray)));
newMeasurements1 = calcNewArray(oldArray);
float *calcNewArray(float *oldArray) {
float *newArray;
int new_size = sizeof(oldArray) - outliers;
newArray = malloc((new_size) * sizeof(float));
for (i = 0; i < new_size; i++) {
newArray[i] = oldArray[i];
}
return newArray;
}
I am not sure if this is the correct way to do this because I have to call the function once to know the size of the new array. And then call the function a second time to actually assign the array to the allocated memory.
How best can I do this?
This line is useless:
newMeasurements1 = malloc(sizeof(calcNewArray(oldArray)));
just write this:
newMeasurements1 = calcNewArray(oldArray);
The malloc is already done in calcNewArray.
But there is another problem in calcNewArray, arrays decay to pointers to their first element when you pass them to a function, therefore sizeof(oldArray) is no the sizte bof the array you passed to calcNewArray but it is the size of a pointer. You need to pass the size of oldArray explicitely as a second parameter:
float *calcNewArray(float *oldArray, int oldsize) {
float *newArray;
int new_size = oldsize - outliers;
newArray = malloc((new_size) * sizeof(float));
for (i = 0; i < new_size; i++) {
newArray[i] = oldArray[i];
}
return newArray;
}
I have an n sized array of structs dynamically allocated, and each position of the array is an array too, with different sizes for each position (an array of arrays).
I created a function to delete a given array[index] but I'm facing some undefined behavior, for example:
If the array is of size 3, if I delete array[0],I can't access array[1]. This happens with other combinations of indexes too. The only way it works flawlessly is when I delete from end to start.
Here is the code I have:
Structures:
typedef struct point{
char id[5];
char type[5];
char color[10];
int x;
int y;
} Point;
typedef struct {
char lineID[5];
int nPoints;
Point *pt;
}railData;
typedef struct railway {
railData data;
}railway;
This is how the array was created:
headRail = (railway**)calloc(lineNum,sizeof(railway*));
And each Rail:
headRail[i] = (railway*)calloc(pointsNum,sizeof(railway));
These are the functions to delete a rail:
railway **delRail(railway **headRail, int j)
{
int nPts = 0;
if (!headRail)
{
puts(ERRORS[NULLPOINTER]);
return NULL;
}
// Number of rail points on jth rail
nPts = headRail[j]->data.nPoints;
// Free each rail point from jth rail
for (int i = 0; i < nPts; ++i)
{
free(headRail[j][i].data.pt);
}
// Free allocated memory for jth rail
free(headRail[j]);
return headRail;
}
And this is where I call the previous function:
railway **removeRail(railway **headRail)
{
char userID[20];
int index = 0;
// Quit if no rails
if (!headRail)
{
backToMenu("No rails available!");
return NULL;
}
// Get user input
getString("\nRail ID: ",userID,MINLEN,MAXLEN); // MINLEN = 2 MAXLEN = 4
// get index of the asked rail
getRailIndex(headRail,userID,&index);
if (index != NOTFOUND)
{
headRail = delRail(headRail, index);
// Update number of rails in the array (global var)
NUMOFRAILS--;
backToMenu("Rail deleted!\n");
}
else
backToMenu("Rail not found!");
return headRail;
}
So my question is how can I modify my code so that when position i is eliminated, all other indexes are shifted left and the last position, which would be empty, is discarded (something like realloc but for shrinking)
Is what I'm asking doable without changing the array's structure?
When removing element i, do memmove all the data from i+1 to i to the end of the array and then realloc with the size decremented by 1.
Note that arrays in C do not track their size in any way, so you need to pass the size by an external way.
Your data abstraction is strange. I would expect that headRail[j][0].data.nPoints is used to store the number of points inside the headRail[j][0].data structure, yet there you store the count of headRails in the j row headRail[j][<this count>]. I would advise to rewrite the abstraction, have one "object" for the railway and another for hadling two dimensional arrays of railways with dynamic sizes in all directions.
Like:
railway **delRail(railway **headRail, int j)
{
...
// this is strange, it's equal to
// nPts = headRail[j][0].data.nPoints;
// dunno if you mean that,
// or if [j][0].data.nPoints refers to the size of
// headRail[j][0].data.pt or to the size of the whole array
size_t nPts = headRail[j]->data.nPoints;
for (size_t i = 0; i < nPts; ++i) {
free(headRail[j][i].data.pt);
}
free(headRail[j]);
// note that arrays in C does not know how many elements are there in the array
// so you typically pass that along the arguments, like
// railway **delRail(railway **headRail, size_t railcount, int j);
size_t headRailCount = lineNum; // some external knowledge of the size
memmove(&headRail[j], &headRail[j + 1], (headRailCount - j - 1) * sizeof(*headRail));
void *pnt = realloc(headRail, (headRailCount - 1) * sizeof(*headRail));
if (pnt == NULL) return NULL; // that would be strange
headRail = pnt; // note that the previous headRail is no longer valid
--lineNum; // decrement that object where you store the size of the array
return headRail;
}
What about some encapsulation and more structs instead of 2d array? 2d arrays are really a bit of pain for C, what about:
typedef struct {
// stores a single row of rail datas
struct railData_row_s {
// stores a pointer to an array of rail datas
railData *data;
// stores the count of how many datas of rails are stored here
size_t datacnt;
// stores a pointer to an array of rows of rail datas
} *raildatas;
// stores the size of the pointer of rows of rail datas
size_t raildatascnt;
} railway;
The count of mallocs will stay the same, but thinking about data will get simpler. And each pointer that points to an array of data has it's own size tracking variable. An allocation might look like this:
railway *rail_new(size_t lineNum, size_t pointsNum) {
railway *r = calloc(1, sizeof(*r));
if (!r) { return NULL; }
// allocate the memory for rows of raildata
r->raildatascnt = lineNum;
r->raildatas = calloc(r->raildatascnt, sizeof(*r->raildatas));
if (!t->raildatas) { /* error hadnling */ free(r); abort(); }
// for each row of raildata
for (size_t i = 0; i < r->raildatascnt; ++i) {
struct railData_row_s * const row = &r->raildatas[i];
// allocate the memory for the column of raildata
// hah, looks similar to the above?
row->datacnt = pointsNum;
row->data = calloc(row->datacnt, sizeof(*row->data));
if (!row->data) { /* error ahdnling */ abort(); }
}
return r;
}
I am trying to create an array of c string in C, which simulates a behavior similar to that of vector array in c++. The array doubles its capacity whenever the (currentSize + 1) is equal to (MAX_SIZE). This is how I am doing it:
void addLog(char ** dynamicArray, int* size, int *maxSize, int command){
if (*size < *maxSize){
dynamicArray[*size] = "User selects option 1 from main menu.";
(*size)++;
}
else{
//resizing the array here
int originalSize = *maxSize;
*maxSize = *maxSize * 2;
//copy elements of dynamic array in temporary array
char **tempArray = (char**)malloc(originalSize * sizeof(char*));
for (int i = 0; i < originalSize; ++i){
memcpy(&tempArray[i], &dynamicArray[i], sizeof(dynamicArray[i]));
}
//create new array of max * 2 size
dynamicArray = (char**)malloc(*maxSize * sizeof(char*));
//copy temp to dynamic
for (int i = 0; i < originalSize; ++i){
memcpy(&dynamicArray[i], &tempArray[i], strlen(tempArray[i]));
}
for (int i = 0; i < originalSize; i++) {
free(tempArray[i]); <---- this throws an exception on heap
}
free(tempArray);
//insert new element now
dynamicArray[*size] = "User selects option 1 from main menu.";
(*size)++;
}
}
I believe this is a trivial problem for a deep copy scenario. How to resize dynamic array to 2 * capacity and then free the temporary existing elements?
You could create a reusable implementation yourself by extending a struct.
This is a bit long, but it walks you through the entire process and should have everything you need to know:
http://eddmann.com/posts/implementing-a-dynamic-vector-array-in-c/
The structure will take advantage of a fixed-size array, with a counter invariant that keeps track of how many elements are currently present. If the underlying array becomes exhausted, the addition operation will re-allocate the contents to a larger size, by way of a copy."
let's say I have a functions below.
void function createBands(boolean option) {
int i, j;
int ***bands = (int ***)malloc((SIZE + 1) * sizeof(int **));
for (i = 0; i < SIZE; i++) {
bands[i] = (int **)malloc(HEIGHT * sizeof(int *));
for (j = 0; j < HEIGHT; j++)
bands[i][j] = (int *)malloc(WIDTH * sizeof(int));
}
iterator *it =
createIterator(params); // do not be confused it is a structure with
// methods andaeribute just like Iterator class in
// java . Methods are poniters to functions.
repare_array(bands[Size], it);
}
void prepare_array(int **band, iterator *it) { read_array(band, it); }
read_array(int **band, iterator *it) {
for (int i = 0; i < Height; i++)
band[i] = (int *)it->next();
}
// Now in Iterator.c I have the iterator structure with the methods etc I will
// write just some line form iterator.
void *next() {
byte *b =
a function that reads bytes form a file and returns byte * CORECTLY !!!;
return b == NULL ? NULL : bytetoT(b);
// this function make void form byte conversion but it doesnt work so I make
// only a cast in read_aray as you see. SUppose just return b wich is byte(i
// know in C isn't any byte but I redeclared all the types to be JAVA.)
}
the questions is where I should allocate the bands because in this situation the 1D vector return by function is ok because I see the values in the function scope. But when it is return to array[i] I got a unallocated 3dVector.
I need to recieve bands[size][i][j] with the data form b. In b the data is good then I ve gote bands null.
What I have do so far I make another allocation in prepare aray before the call to read_array where I allocate **band and then I have some results but I am not confident.
Sorry for the confusion! And every comment is good for me. Maybe what I have do is ok I do not know!.
I am not new to C I just do not work with pointers for a long time.
If it is a 2D pointer(**) you have to assign it with the address of 2D array and if it is 1D array you have to assign it with the address of 1D array.
For your read_array function
read_array(int**array...)
{
for(i=0;i<HEIGHT(the same as in allocation);i++)
`enter code here`array[i] = function();//function return an 1D array
}
Make sure that function() returns the address of the 1D array.
I've just re-start learning C, but i'm really confused with some memory management details.
I'm getting
pointer being freed was not allocated ... Abort trap
for the code below. Do i really need 1 free per malloc? Why my code is wrong?
Thanks!
#define N 9
typedef struct
{
int MAX_LIST_SIZE;
int length;
int *ini;
}List;
/* allocates new List and its data */
List *newList(int size)
{
List *list = malloc(sizeof(List));
list->MAX_LIST_SIZE = size;
list->length = 0;
list->ini = malloc(sizeof(int) * size);
return list;
}
/* add some value to the list */
void addList(List *list, int val)
{
if (list->length < list->MAX_LIST_SIZE)
list->ini[list->length++] = val;
else
fprintf(stderr, "Error: add(): List is full.\n");
}
/* get an array of N*N lists malloc-ed Lists */
List *gridList()
{
int i, j;
List *cells = malloc(sizeof(List) * N * N);
for (i = 0; i < N * N; i++)
{
/* malloc is called inside NewList()*/
cells[i] = *newList(N);
for (j = 0; j < N; j++)
addList(&cells[i], j + 1);
}
return cells;
}
/* inside main */
List *cells = gridList();
/* use cells ... */
/* free */
for (i = 0; i < N * N; i++)
{
free(cells[i].ini);
/* line below causes CRASH */
free(&cells[i]);
}
You do :
cells[i] = *newList(N);
which sets each element in cells to a copy of the list dynamically allocated by newList. So newList dynamically allocates a list, then you take the pointer to that dynamically allocated List, dereference it, and copy it into cells[i]. So then later on when you go to free() each element:
free(&cells[i]);
It doesn't work because each element in cells[i] is a List, not a List * (list pointer) allocated by malloc().
So you have two options. One (bad one) is to just remove that last free() line since there's nothing to free. However, this just covers up a larger problem which is that you now have memory leaks because you can't go back and free the dynamically allocated Lists created with newList().
Instead it's likely you want to have an array of pointers to the lists, which you can do by changing it to:
List **cells = malloc(sizeof(List*) * N * N);
so that cells[i] refers to a List *. newList() returns such a pointer, so you would change that line to:
cells[i] = newList(N);
similarly, addList() takes such a pointer, so you'd simply change that line to:
addList(cells[i], j + 1);
since &cells[i] would pass it the address of the pointer, which is not what you want.
Finally, change the free statements to:
free(cells[i]->ini); // ->init because cells[i] is now a pointer to a List, List *
free(cells[i]);
The problem is you are allocating an array of lists, copying the full contents of your lists into the array elements, and then trying to free them. The original allocated List records are a memory leak, and the free calls are indeed trying to free memory that was not malloc'ed (or more exactly were malloc'ed in a single big block).
You want an array of pointers to pointers to hold your lists:
/* get an array of N*N lists malloc-ed Lists */
List **gridList()
{
int i, j;
// VV note change here
List **cells = malloc(sizeof(List*) * N * N);
for (i = 0; i < N * N; i++)
{
/* malloc is called inside NewList()*/
cells[i] = newList(N); // << Note change here.
for (j = 0; j < N; j++)
addList(cells[i], j + 1);
}
return cells;
}
/* free */
for (i = 0; i < N * N; i++)
{
free(cells[i]->ini); // << and here
/* line below causes CRASH */
free(cells[i]); // << and here
}
free(cells);