Valgrind detects various inferior related leaks, such as:
==31877== 5,530 (56 direct, 5,474 indirect) bytes in 1 blocks are definitely lost in loss record 7,131 of 7,355
==31877== at 0x4C2E18C: calloc (vg_replace_malloc.c:760)
==31877== by 0x23E580: xcalloc (alloc.c:100)
==31877== by 0x4794A9: xcnewvec<void*> (poison.h:158)
==31877== by 0x4794A9: registry_alloc_data(registry_data_registry*, registry_fields*) (registry.c:51)
==31877== by 0x3A537C: inferior_alloc_data (inferior.c:43)
==31877== by 0x3A537C: inferior::inferior(int) (inferior.c:92)
==31877== by 0x3A5426: add_inferior_silent(int) (inferior.c:98)
==31877== by 0x3A5530: add_inferior(int) (inferior.c:122)
...
Origin of the leaks is in prune_inferiors: prune_inferiors is first removing
the inferior to prune from the inferior list, then calls delete_inferior.
But delete_inferior will only really destroy the inferior when it finds
it into the inferior list.
As delete_inferior is removing the inferior to delete from the inferior list,
ensure prune_inferiors only calls delete_inferior, without touching the
inferior list.
gdb/ChangeLog
2019-12-05 Philippe Waroquiers <philippe.waroquiers@skynet.be>
* inferior.c (prune_inferiors): Only call delete_inferior.
Do not modify the inferior list.
+2019-12-05 Philippe Waroquiers <philippe.waroquiers@skynet.be>
+ * inferior.c (prune_inferiors): Only call delete_inferior,
+ Do not modify the inferior list.
+
2019-12-05 Simon Marchi <simon.marchi@polymtl.ca>
* c-exp.y: Update calls to lookup_typename,
void
prune_inferiors (void)
{
- struct inferior *ss, **ss_link;
+ inferior *ss;
ss = inferior_list;
- ss_link = &inferior_list;
while (ss)
{
if (!ss->deletable ()
|| !ss->removable
|| ss->pid != 0)
{
- ss_link = &ss->next;
- ss = *ss_link;
+ ss = ss->next;
continue;
}
- *ss_link = ss->next;
+ inferior *ss_next = ss->next;
delete_inferior (ss);
- ss = *ss_link;
+ ss = ss_next;
}
}