CODEWITHSUNDEEP
c
Craig Sparks
Craig Sparks

Reputation: 23

malloc and freeing memory between threads in C

I am sharing a set of globals between different threads, so I allocate the memory as needed depending on how much is being placed into it. Kinda like a buffer. Whenever I try to free it from the same thread, but different function, glib goes crazy and segfaults.

I'm not a c programmer by far. I am trying to clear up memory leaks in the code that I hacked together.

char *keybuffer[], *valuesbuffer[], *returnbuffer[], *bufferaction;
int memcache_lock=1,*bufferelements, bufferowner=0;


void memcache_clear_buffers(){   
        free(&bufferaction); //I get the same reaction when I have the & and without the &
//      free(*keybuffer);    //I thought maybe I need to use the pointer. Then
//      free(*valuesbuffer); // I thought maybe I needed to reference the address in memory.
//      free(*returnbuffer); // I appreciate any help.
//      free(*bufferelements);
}

void memcache_allocate_buffers(int size){
        *keybuffer = (char *)malloc(size * sizeof(char *));
        *valuesbuffer = (char *)malloc(size * sizeof(char *)); 
        *returnbuffer = (char *)malloc(size  * sizeof(char *));
        bufferelements = malloc(sizeof(int));
        bufferaction = (char *)malloc(sizeof(char*));
}

Here is the output from valgrind.

 3500== Invalid free() / delete / delete[]
 ==3500==    at 0x4027C02: free (vg_replace_malloc.c:366)
 ==3500==    by 0x4191D4C: memcache_clear_buffers (dm_memcache.c:254)
 ==3500==    by 0x41921ED: memcache_set (dm_memcache.c:328)
 ==3500==    by 0x4192281: memcache_sid (dm_memcache.c:151) 
 ==3500==    by 0x418316D: db_user_exists (dm_db.c:3208)
 ==3500==    by 0x403F7F2: auth_user_exists (authsql.c:49)
 ==3500==    by 0x419ADA6: auth_user_exists (authmodule.c:130)
 ==3500==    by 0x4040D4E: auth_validate (authsql.c:333)
 ==3500==    by 0x419B106: auth_validate (authmodule.c:163)
 ==3500==    by 0x74656CFF: ???
 ==3500==  Address 0x41b55c0 is 0 bytes inside data symbol "bufferaction"

How is it an invalid free?

Upvotes: 2

Views: 12451

Answers (2)

Lundin
Lundin

Reputation: 213513

  • malloc() and free() are not thread-safe functions. You need to protect the calls to those functions with a mutex.
  • You need to protect all shared variables with a mutex as well. You can use the same one as you use for malloc/free, one per variable.
  • You need to declare variables shared between several threads as volatile, to prevent dangerous optimizer bugs on some compilers. Note that this is no replacement for mutex guards.
  • Are the buffers arrays, or two-dimensional arrays (like arrays of C strings)? You have declared all buffers as potential two-dimensional arrays, but you never allocate the inner-most dimension.
  • Never typecast the result of malloc in C. Read this and this.
  • free(bufferaction), not free(&bufferaction).
  • Initialize all pointers to NULL explicitly. After free(), make sure to set the pointer to NULL. Before the memory is accessed by either thread, make sure to check the pointer against NULL.

Upvotes: 4

zmbq
zmbq

Reputation: 39013

You're freeing &bufferaction when you should be freeing bufferaction (no ampersand)

I also suspect you may be corrupting memory when you use bufferaction. You see, you're only allocating 4 bytes (or 8 if you're compiling for a 64-bit platform). If you use any more than that, you'll end up corrupting memory after the allocated memory. This may only show itself when freeing up the memory, because you might have messed with some internal heap structure.

I really don't think this is a concurrency-related bug.

Upvotes: 1

Related Questions