➜
This issue tracker has been migrated to GitHub,
and is currently read-only.
For more information,
see the GitHub FAQs in the Python's Developer Guide.
Created on 2010-07-29 20:33 by Winston451, last changed 2022-04-11 14:57 by admin. This issue is now closed.
| Files | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| File name | Uploaded | Description | Edit | |
| leak.py | Winston451, 2010-07-29 20:33 | file reproducing the issue | ||
| leak.patch | Winston451, 2010-07-29 21:00 | |||
| Messages (9) | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| msg111995 - (view) | Author: (Winston451) | Date: 2010-07-29 20:33 | |
The s_init function of the _struct.c file does not free the s_codes field before storing a new address into it. So when a Struct object is reinitialized the memory block pointed to by s_codes is lost. The file attached with the bug report shows a code which reproduce the problem. |
|||
| msg112002 - (view) | Author: Mark Dickinson (mark.dickinson) *  |
Date: 2010-07-29 20:47 | |
Thanks for the report! I'll look into this. Do you happen to have a patch available, or an interest in writing one? |
|||
| msg112003 - (view) | Author: Mark Dickinson (mark.dickinson) * |
Date: 2010-07-29 20:48 | |
Add versions. |
|||
| msg112005 - (view) | Author: (Winston451) | Date: 2010-07-29 21:00 | |
Hi Mark, I added a patch in the file list that should correct the bug. |
|||
| msg112006 - (view) | Author: Mark Dickinson (mark.dickinson) * |
Date: 2010-07-29 21:03 | |
Great! Thank you. I wonder whether the weakreflist field needs to be cleared similarly. |
|||
| msg112013 - (view) | Author: (Winston451) | Date: 2010-07-29 21:29 | |
I don't think that the weakreflist should be cleared. After all the object is just reinitialized not destructed. |
|||
| msg112015 - (view) | Author: Mark Dickinson (mark.dickinson) * |
Date: 2010-07-29 21:48 | |
Yes, you're right of course. Fixed in r83239 (py3k), r83240 (release31-maint), r83241 (release27-maint) and r83242 (release26-maint). Thanks! BTW, just out of curiosity: I don't think I've ever seen anyone re-initialize a struct.Struct object before. What's the reason for doing this instead of creating a new one? |
|||
| msg112016 - (view) | Author: (Winston451) | Date: 2010-07-29 22:05 | |
I was just looking at the code of the struct when i saw this problem. Personnally I have never had to reinitialize a Struct object but Python allows it so... |
|||
| msg112021 - (view) | Author: (Winston451) | Date: 2010-07-29 23:00 | |
BTW, I am really amazed by your reactivity. I submitted a bug report at 22:33 and one hour later it's fixed. It's really great! Keep up the good work! :) |
|||
| History | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Date | User | Action | Args |
| 2022-04-11 14:57:04 | admin | set | github: 53668 |
| 2010-07-29 23:00:52 | Winston451 | set | messages: + msg112021 |
| 2010-07-29 22:05:51 | Winston451 | set | messages: + msg112016 |
| 2010-07-29 21:48:48 | mark.dickinson | set | status: open -> closed resolution: fixed messages: + msg112015 |
| 2010-07-29 21:29:32 | Winston451 | set | messages: + msg112013 |
| 2010-07-29 21:03:12 | mark.dickinson | set | messages: + msg112006 |
| 2010-07-29 21:01:00 | Winston451 | set | files:
+ leak.patch keywords: + patch messages: + msg112005 |
| 2010-07-29 20:48:43 | mark.dickinson | set | stage: needs patch messages: + msg112003 versions: + Python 3.1, Python 2.7, Python 3.2 |
| 2010-07-29 20:47:18 | mark.dickinson | set | assignee: mark.dickinson |
| 2010-07-29 20:47:06 | mark.dickinson | set | nosy:
+ mark.dickinson messages: + msg112002 |
| 2010-07-29 20:33:32 | Winston451 | create | |