我使用C++11智能指针实现了一个链接列表。该实现使用shared_ptr存储内部数据结构,用于实现内部数据的隐式共享。我提供了下面源代码的相关部分:
namespace Algos {
template <typename T>
struct LinkedListData{
struct Node {
std::unique_ptr<Node> next;
Node *prev = nullptr;
T data;
};
std::unique_ptr<Node> root;
Node *last = nullptr;
int size = 0;
LinkedListData() {
root = std::make_unique<Node>();
root->prev = nullptr; //last virtual element
root->next = std::make_unique<Node>();
last = root->next.get();
last->prev = root.get();
last->next = nullptr;
}
//deferr pointers manually to avoid stackoverflow due to
//recursion explosion
static void cleanup(LinkedListData<T> *data) {
#ifdef DEBUG_TXT
int nodeCount=0;
#endif
Node *n = data->last;
if(n==nullptr) { return; }
while(n) {
#ifdef DEBUG_TXT
if(n->next.get())
std::cout << "Release {n->next()} [" << ++nodeCount <<
"]: "<< n->next.get() << std::endl;
#endif
n->next.release();
ALGO_ASSERT(n->next.get() == nullptr, "Node reference not deferred");
n = n->prev;
}
data->size = 0;
#ifdef DEBUG_TXT
std::cout << "Release {Root} [" << ++nodeCount << "]: "<< data->root.get() << std::endl;
#endif
data->root.release();
}
};
template <class T>
class LinkedList {
typedef typename LinkedListData<T>::Node node_type;
std::shared_ptr<LinkedListData<T> > d;
public:
LinkedList() : d(new LinkedListData<T>(), LinkedListData<T>::cleanup){}
/* Code omitted .... */
};
}由于使用了新的代码,下面的代码在shared_pointer构造函数中的val研中触发内存泄漏错误:
#include <iostream>
#include <string>
#include <unistd.h>
// #define DEBUG_TXT
#include "global/assert.h"
#include "linked_list/linkedlist.h"
#define TEST_SIZE 5000
struct DataTest {
int integer;
bool boolean;
std::string txt;
DataTest& operator=(const DataTest& other) {
integer = other.integer;
boolean = other.boolean;
txt = other.txt;
return (*this);
}
bool operator==(const DataTest& other) const {
return (
integer == other.integer &&
boolean == other.boolean &&
txt == other.txt
);
}
};
struct Data {
DataTest data[TEST_SIZE];
const int n = TEST_SIZE;
static void initDataSample(Data &d) {
for(int i=0; i<d.n; i++) {
d.data[i].integer = i;
d.data[i].boolean = (i%2 == 0);
d.data[i].txt = "abc";
}
}
};
void appendElements(Algos::LinkedList<DataTest> &l, const Data& d){
for(int i=0; i<d.n; i++) {
l.append(d.data[i]);
}
}
void prependElements(Algos::LinkedList<DataTest> &l, const Data& d) {
for(int i=d.n-1; i>=0; i--) {
l.prepend(d.data[i]);
}
}
int main(int argv, char* argc[]) {
Data d;
Data::initDataSample(d);
Algos::LinkedList<DataTest> l1;
{
Algos::LinkedList<DataTest> l2;
l1 = l2;
}
sleep(2);
appendElements(l1, d);
int removeSize = l1.size()/2;
for(int i=0; i<removeSize; i++)
l1.takeFirst();
prependElements(l1, d);
removeSize = l1.size()/2;
for(int i=0; i<removeSize; i++)
l1.takeLast();
return 0;
}这是我在val研磨控制台得到的信息:
> ==8897== HEAP SUMMARY:
==8897== in use at exit: 282,976 bytes in 3,757 blocks
==8897== total heap usage: 10,009 allocs, 6,252 frees, 633,040 bytes allocated
==8897==
==8897== 136 (24 direct, 112 indirect) bytes in 1 blocks are definitely lost in loss record 5 of 8
==8897== at 0x4C2E216: operator new(unsigned long) (vg_replace_malloc.c:334)
==8897== by 0x407C1C: Algos::LinkedList<DataTest>::LinkedList() (linkedlist.h:74)
==8897== by 0x4074B4: main (insert_delete_rounds.cpp:63)
==8897==
==8897== 210,136 (24 direct, 210,112 indirect) bytes in 1 blocks are definitely lost in loss record 8 of 8
==8897== at 0x4C2E216: operator new(unsigned long) (vg_replace_malloc.c:334)
==8897== by 0x407C1C: Algos::LinkedList<DataTest>::LinkedList() (linkedlist.h:74)
==8897== by 0x4074C3: main (insert_delete_rounds.cpp:65)
==8897==
==8897== LEAK SUMMARY:
==8897== definitely lost: 48 bytes in 2 blocks
==8897== indirectly lost: 210,224 bytes in 3,754 blocks
==8897== possibly lost: 0 bytes in 0 blocks
==8897== still reachable: 72,704 bytes in 1 blocks
==8897== suppressed: 0 bytes in 0 blocks
==8897== Reachable blocks (those to which a pointer was found) are not shown.
==8897== To see them, rerun with: --leak-check=full --show-leak-kinds=all
==8897==
==8897== For counts of detected and suppressed errors, rerun with: -v
==8897== ERROR SUMMARY: 2 errors from 2 contexts (suppressed: 0 from 0)据我所知,在没有使用std::make_shared()中的新的情况下,使用自定义的Deleter启动没有其他方法。在阅读了文档和堆栈溢出上的不同线程之后,我注意到,shared_ptr不支持传递自定义的Deleter。那么,我的问题是:这个内存泄漏警告合法吗?如果是的话,能避免吗?
开发工具设置:
发布于 2018-03-25 16:45:56
回答你的问题:
LinkedListData的内部,但是您从来没有在cleanup方法中对分配的指针进行delete。应该从cleanup析构函数中调用LinkedListData,并且应该使用常规删除器(如果使用自定义分配器)调用LinkedListData指针的自定义删除器。简而言之,这一行总是会导致内存泄漏:
LinkedList() : d(new LinkedListData<T>(), LinkedListData<T>::cleanup){}发布于 2018-03-25 16:46:37
您创建了一个new LinkedListData<T>(),但在cleanup中不调用它的delete。
发布于 2018-03-25 17:01:45
由于您在内部使用智能指针,所以不应该将LinkedListData::cleanup指定为自定义删除器,而应该使用默认的删除器。如果您试图坚持使用智能指针,如果您没有显式调用new,那么避免使用delete调用可能是个好主意。因此,d成员可以只使用d(std::make_shared<LinkedListData<T>>())初始化。而且,它也可以声明为LinkedListData<T> d;,而不需要任何智能指针。
然后,您不应该在release中调用LinkedListData::cleanup。此方法从智能指针包装器中分离原始指针,并且不释放关联对象。您可能需要的是reset。但是,这个方法根本不应该是必需的,因为您的所有指针都是智能的,在调用父析构函数时,应该自动清除相关的数据。
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/49478215
复制相似问题