简体   繁体   English

c pthreads + valgrind =内存泄漏:为什么?

[英]c pthreads + valgrind = memory leak : why?

I am getting started with pthreads in C and I am also a maniac of writing my code as "bug-free" as I possibly can. 我开始使用C语言中的pthreads,我也是一个疯狂的人,我尽可能地将我的代码编写为“无bug”。

Despite trying to be extra careful, valgrind is telling me that I am leaking memory, regardless weather: 尽管要特别小心,valgrind告诉我,无论天气如何,我都在泄漏记忆:

  1. I create joinable threads that I join upon completion (code snippet 1) 我创建了可以在完成后加入的可连接线程(代码片段1)
  2. I create joinable threads that I detach after creation (code snippet 2) 我创建了可在创建后分离的可连接线程(代码片段2)
  3. I create detached threads (code snippet 3) 我创建分离的线程(代码片段3)

I know this has already been discussed (see this , this and also this ), but I am still curious as to: 我知道这已经讨论过(看到这个这个也是这个 ),但我仍然很好奇:

  1. Why on certain runs I end up with no errors? 为什么在某些运行中我最终没有错误?
  2. Why there seems to be a random number of overall mallocs() when dealing with detached threads? 为什么在处理分离的线程时似乎有一个随机数量的整体mallocs()? << answer provided by nos, code snippet "fixed" with an added delay in the main() <<由nos提供的答案,代码片段“已修复”,主要()中添加了延迟
  3. Why do the "memory-leak" persist even when dealing with detached threads? 为什么即使在处理分离的线程时“内存泄漏”仍然存在? << same as 2. <<与2相同。

As I understand from the previous answers and the valgrind trace, pthread_create() is the root cause, extending the stack used by threads as necessary and reusing it at times, thus a few missing frees. 正如我从前面的答案和valgrind跟踪中所理解的那样,pthread_create()是根本原因,根据需要扩展线程使用的堆栈并且有时重用它,因此有一些丢失的自由。 But what is less clear is why it depends on the execution run and why it also happens when creating detached threads. 但不太清楚的是,为什么它依赖于执行运行以及为什么在创建分离线程时也会发生这种情况。 As I have seen from certain answers, comments and also from the man, the resources from a detached thread will be freed upon thread completion. 正如我从某些答案,评论以及该人那样看到的,来自分离线程的资源将在线程完成时释放。 I have tried various tweaks to work around this (added a sleep time before the end of each thread, before the end of the main thread, increased the stack size, add more "work"...) but it didn't change the end result by much. 我已经尝试了各种调整来解决这个问题(在每个线程结束之前添加一个休眠时间,在主线程结束之前,增加堆栈大小,添加更多“工作”......)但它没有改变结果很多。 Also, why is there a random number of overall "mallocs()" when dealing with detached threads, does valgrind lose track of some of the detached threads? 另外,为什么在处理分离的线程时会有一个随机数的整体“mallocs()”,valgrind是否会丢失一些分离的线程? This also does not seem to depend on the stack size. 这似乎也不依赖于堆栈大小。

The provided code is a mock example of a manager/workers model for which a joinable/join() approach to thread management seems more suitable imho. 提供的代码是一个管理器/工作者模型的模拟示例,对于该模型,线程管理的joinable / join()方法似乎更适合imho。

Thanks for any enlightenment you might be able to provide! 感谢您提供的任何启发! I also hope these (over-commented) snippets of code will be helpful anyone wishing to get started with pthreads. 我也希望这些(过度评论的)代码片段对任何希望开始使用pthreads的人都有所帮助。

- swappy - swappy

PS Sys info: gcc on debian 64bit arch PS Sys信息:debian 64bit arch上的gcc

Code snippet 1 (joinable threads joined): 代码片段1 (可加入的可加入线程):

/* Running this multiple times with valgrind, I sometimes end with :
    - no errors (proper malloc/free balance) 
    - 4 extra malloc vs free (most frequently) 
   The number of mallocs() is more conservative and depends on the number of threads. 
*/

#include <stdlib.h>             /* EXIT_FAILURE, EXIT_SUCCESS macros & the likes */
#include <stdio.h>              /* printf() & the likes */
#include <pthread.h>            /* test subject */

#define MAX_THREADS 100         /* Number of threads */
pthread_attr_t tattr;           /* Thread attribute */
pthread_t workers[MAX_THREADS]; /* All the threads spawned by the main() thread */

/* A mock container structure to pass arguments around */
struct args_for_job_t {
    int tid;
    int status;
};

/* The job each worker will perform upon creation */
void *job(void *arg)
{
    /* Cast arguments in a proper container */
    struct args_for_job_t *container;
    container = (struct args_for_job_t *)arg;

    /* A mock job */
    printf("[TID - %d]\n", container->tid);

    /* Properly exit with status code tid */
    pthread_exit((void *)(&container->status));
}

int main ()
{
    int return_code;                            /* Will hold return codes */
    void *return_status;                        /* Will hold return status */
    int tid;                                    /* Thread id */
    struct args_for_job_t args[MAX_THREADS];    /* For thread safeness */

    /* Initialize and set thread joinable attribute */
    pthread_attr_init(&tattr);
    pthread_attr_setdetachstate(&tattr, PTHREAD_CREATE_JOINABLE);

    /* Spawn detached threads */
    for (tid = 0; tid < MAX_THREADS; tid++)
    {
        args[tid].tid = tid;
        args[tid].status = tid;
        return_code = pthread_create(&workers[tid], &tattr, job, (void *)(&args[tid]));
        if (return_code != 0) { printf("[ERROR] Thread creation failed\n"); return EXIT_FAILURE; }
    }

    /* Free thread attribute */
    pthread_attr_destroy(&tattr);

    /* Properly join() all workers before completion */
    for(tid = 0; tid < MAX_THREADS; tid++)
    {
        return_code = pthread_join(workers[tid], &return_status);
        if (return_code != 0)
        {
            printf("[ERROR] Return code from pthread_join() is %d\n", return_code);
            return EXIT_FAILURE;
        }
        printf("Thread %d joined with return status %d\n", tid, *(int *)return_status);
    }

    return EXIT_SUCCESS;
}

Code snippet 2 (detached threads after creation): 代码片段2 (创建后的分离线程):

/* Running this multiple times with valgrind, I sometimes end with :
    - no errors (proper malloc/free balance) 
    - 1 extra malloc vs free (most frequently) 
   Most surprisingly, it seems there is a random amount of overall mallocs 
*/

#include <stdlib.h>             /* EXIT_FAILURE, EXIT_SUCCESS macros & the likes */
#include <stdio.h>              /* printf() & the likes */
#include <pthread.h>            /* test subject */
#include <unistd.h>         

#define MAX_THREADS 100         /* Number of threads */
pthread_attr_t tattr;           /* Thread attribute */
pthread_t workers[MAX_THREADS]; /* All the threads spawned by the main() thread */

/* A mock container structure to pass arguments around */
struct args_for_job_t {
    int tid;
};

/* The job each worker will perform upon creation */
void *job(void *arg)
{
    /* Cast arguments in a proper container */
    struct args_for_job_t *container;
    container = (struct args_for_job_t *)arg;

    /* A mock job */
    printf("[TID - %d]\n", container->tid);

    /* For the sake of returning something, not necessary */
    return NULL;
}

int main ()
{
    int return_code;                            /* Will hold return codes */
    int tid;                                    /* Thread id */
    struct args_for_job_t args[MAX_THREADS];    /* For thread safeness */

    /* Initialize and set thread joinable attribute */
    pthread_attr_init(&tattr);
    pthread_attr_setdetachstate(&tattr, PTHREAD_CREATE_JOINABLE);

    /* Spawn detached threads */
    for (tid = 0; tid < MAX_THREADS; tid++)
    {
        args[tid].tid = tid;
        return_code = pthread_create(&workers[tid], &tattr, job, (void *)(&args[tid]));
        if (return_code != 0) { printf("[ERROR] Thread creation failed\n"); return EXIT_FAILURE; }
        /* Detach worker after creation */
        pthread_detach(workers[tid]);
    }

    /* Free thread attribute */
    pthread_attr_destroy(&tattr);

    /* Delay main() completion until all detached threads finish their jobs. */
    usleep(100000);
    return EXIT_SUCCESS;
}

Code snippet 3 (detached threads upon creation): 代码片段3 (创建时分离的线程):

/* Running this multiple times with valgrind, I sometimes end with :
    - no errors (proper malloc/free balance) 
    - 1 extra malloc vs free (most frequently) 
   Most surprisingly, it seems there is a random amount of overall mallocs 
*/

#include <stdlib.h>             /* EXIT_FAILURE, EXIT_SUCCESS macros & the likes */
#include <stdio.h>              /* printf() & the likes */
#include <pthread.h>            /* test subject */

#define MAX_THREADS 100         /* Number of threads */
pthread_attr_t tattr;           /* Thread attribute */
pthread_t workers[MAX_THREADS]; /* All the threads spawned by the main() thread */

/* A mock container structure to pass arguments around */
struct args_for_job_t {
    int tid;
};

/* The job each worker will perform upon creation */
void *job(void *arg)
{
    /* Cast arguments in a proper container */
    struct args_for_job_t *container;
    container = (struct args_for_job_t *)arg;

    /* A mock job */
    printf("[TID - %d]\n", container->tid);

    /* For the sake of returning something, not necessary */
    return NULL;
}

int main ()
{
    int return_code;                            /* Will hold return codes */
    int tid;                                    /* Thread id */
    struct args_for_job_t args[MAX_THREADS];    /* For thread safeness */

    /* Initialize and set thread detached attribute */
    pthread_attr_init(&tattr);
    pthread_attr_setdetachstate(&tattr, PTHREAD_CREATE_DETACHED);

    /* Spawn detached threads */
    for (tid = 0; tid < MAX_THREADS; tid++)
    {
        args[tid].tid = tid;
        return_code = pthread_create(&workers[tid], &tattr, job, (void *)(&args[tid]));
        if (return_code != 0) { printf("[ERROR] Thread creation failed\n"); return EXIT_FAILURE; }
    }

    /* Free thread attribute */
    pthread_attr_destroy(&tattr);

    /* Delay main() completion until all detached threads finish their jobs. */
    usleep(100000);
    return EXIT_SUCCESS;
}

Valgrind output for code snippet 1 (joined threads & mem-leak) 代码片段1的Valgrind输出(连接线程和内存泄漏)

==27802== 
==27802== HEAP SUMMARY:
==27802==     in use at exit: 1,558 bytes in 4 blocks
==27802==   total heap usage: 105 allocs, 101 frees, 28,814 bytes allocated
==27802== 
==27802== Searching for pointers to 4 not-freed blocks
==27802== Checked 104,360 bytes
==27802== 
==27802== 36 bytes in 1 blocks are still reachable in loss record 1 of 4
==27802==    at 0x4C2B6CD: malloc (in /usr/lib/valgrind/vgpreload_memcheck-amd64-linux.so)
==27802==    by 0x400894D: _dl_map_object (dl-load.c:162)
==27802==    by 0x401384A: dl_open_worker (dl-open.c:225)
==27802==    by 0x400F175: _dl_catch_error (dl-error.c:178)
==27802==    by 0x4013319: _dl_open (dl-open.c:639)
==27802==    by 0x517F601: do_dlopen (dl-libc.c:89)
==27802==    by 0x400F175: _dl_catch_error (dl-error.c:178)
==27802==    by 0x517F6C3: __libc_dlopen_mode (dl-libc.c:48)
==27802==    by 0x4E423BB: pthread_cancel_init (unwind-forcedunwind.c:53)
==27802==    by 0x4E4257B: _Unwind_ForcedUnwind (unwind-forcedunwind.c:130)
==27802==    by 0x4E4069F: __pthread_unwind (unwind.c:130)
==27802==    by 0x4E3AFF4: pthread_exit (pthreadP.h:265)
==27802== 
==27802== 36 bytes in 1 blocks are still reachable in loss record 2 of 4
==27802==    at 0x4C2B6CD: malloc (in /usr/lib/valgrind/vgpreload_memcheck-amd64-linux.so)
==27802==    by 0x400B7EC: _dl_new_object (dl-object.c:161)
==27802==    by 0x4006805: _dl_map_object_from_fd (dl-load.c:1051)
==27802==    by 0x4008699: _dl_map_object (dl-load.c:2568)
==27802==    by 0x401384A: dl_open_worker (dl-open.c:225)
==27802==    by 0x400F175: _dl_catch_error (dl-error.c:178)
==27802==    by 0x4013319: _dl_open (dl-open.c:639)
==27802==    by 0x517F601: do_dlopen (dl-libc.c:89)
==27802==    by 0x400F175: _dl_catch_error (dl-error.c:178)
==27802==    by 0x517F6C3: __libc_dlopen_mode (dl-libc.c:48)
==27802==    by 0x4E423BB: pthread_cancel_init (unwind-forcedunwind.c:53)
==27802==    by 0x4E4257B: _Unwind_ForcedUnwind (unwind-forcedunwind.c:130)
==27802== 
==27802== 312 bytes in 1 blocks are still reachable in loss record 3 of 4
==27802==    at 0x4C29DB4: calloc (in /usr/lib/valgrind/vgpreload_memcheck-amd64-linux.so)
==27802==    by 0x4010B59: _dl_check_map_versions (dl-version.c:300)
==27802==    by 0x4013E1F: dl_open_worker (dl-open.c:268)
==27802==    by 0x400F175: _dl_catch_error (dl-error.c:178)
==27802==    by 0x4013319: _dl_open (dl-open.c:639)
==27802==    by 0x517F601: do_dlopen (dl-libc.c:89)
==27802==    by 0x400F175: _dl_catch_error (dl-error.c:178)
==27802==    by 0x517F6C3: __libc_dlopen_mode (dl-libc.c:48)
==27802==    by 0x4E423BB: pthread_cancel_init (unwind-forcedunwind.c:53)
==27802==    by 0x4E4257B: _Unwind_ForcedUnwind (unwind-forcedunwind.c:130)
==27802==    by 0x4E4069F: __pthread_unwind (unwind.c:130)
==27802==    by 0x4E3AFF4: pthread_exit (pthreadP.h:265)
==27802== 
==27802== 1,174 bytes in 1 blocks are still reachable in loss record 4 of 4
==27802==    at 0x4C29DB4: calloc (in /usr/lib/valgrind/vgpreload_memcheck-amd64-linux.so)
==27802==    by 0x400B57D: _dl_new_object (dl-object.c:77)
==27802==    by 0x4006805: _dl_map_object_from_fd (dl-load.c:1051)
==27802==    by 0x4008699: _dl_map_object (dl-load.c:2568)
==27802==    by 0x401384A: dl_open_worker (dl-open.c:225)
==27802==    by 0x400F175: _dl_catch_error (dl-error.c:178)
==27802==    by 0x4013319: _dl_open (dl-open.c:639)
==27802==    by 0x517F601: do_dlopen (dl-libc.c:89)
==27802==    by 0x400F175: _dl_catch_error (dl-error.c:178)
==27802==    by 0x517F6C3: __libc_dlopen_mode (dl-libc.c:48)
==27802==    by 0x4E423BB: pthread_cancel_init (unwind-forcedunwind.c:53)
==27802==    by 0x4E4257B: _Unwind_ForcedUnwind (unwind-forcedunwind.c:130)
==27802== 
==27802== LEAK SUMMARY:
==27802==    definitely lost: 0 bytes in 0 blocks
==27802==    indirectly lost: 0 bytes in 0 blocks
==27802==      possibly lost: 0 bytes in 0 blocks
==27802==    still reachable: 1,558 bytes in 4 blocks
==27802==         suppressed: 0 bytes in 0 blocks
==27802== 
==27802== ERROR SUMMARY: 0 errors from 0 contexts (suppressed: 2 from 2)
--27802-- 
--27802-- used_suppression:      2 dl-hack3-cond-1
==27802== 
==27802== ERROR SUMMARY: 0 errors from 0 contexts (suppressed: 2 from 2)

Valgrind output for code snippet 1 (no mem-leak, a few runs later) Valgrind输出代码片段1(没有内存泄漏,稍后运行几次)

--29170-- Discarding syms at 0x64168d0-0x6426198 in /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libgcc_s.so.1 due to munmap()
==29170== 
==29170== HEAP SUMMARY:
==29170==     in use at exit: 0 bytes in 0 blocks
==29170==   total heap usage: 105 allocs, 105 frees, 28,814 bytes allocated
==29170== 
==29170== All heap blocks were freed -- no leaks are possible
==29170== 
==29170== ERROR SUMMARY: 0 errors from 0 contexts (suppressed: 2 from 2)
--29170-- 
--29170-- used_suppression:      2 dl-hack3-cond-1
==29170== 
==29170== ERROR SUMMARY: 0 errors from 0 contexts (suppressed: 2 from 2)

You have a bug in when your threads are detached, causing undefined behavior. 你的线程分离时有一个错误,导致未定义的行为。

In main you have this line of code: 主要是你有这行代码:

struct args_for_job_t args[MAX_THREADS];

Which you hand of pointers to your worker threads. 您指向工作线程的指针。

Then main() reaches this part 然后main()到达这一部分

pthread_exit(NULL);

And main() ceases to exist, but you still may have worker threads around, that accesses the above args array that's on the stack of main() - which doesn't exist anymore. 并且main()不再存在,但你仍然可能有工作线程,它访问上面的args数组,它位于main()的堆栈上 - 它不再存在。 Your worker threads might all finish before main() ends in some runs, but not in other runs. 您的工作线程可能在main()在某些运行中结束之前完成,但在其他运行中则不会。

声明:本站的技术帖子网页,遵循CC BY-SA 4.0协议,如果您需要转载,请注明本站网址或者原文地址。任何问题请咨询:yoyou2525@163.com.

 
粤ICP备18138465号  © 2020-2024 STACKOOM.COM