This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: Fix hashtable memory leak

From: Jonathan Wakely <jwakely at redhat dot com>
To: François Dumont <frs dot dumont at gmail dot com>
Cc: "libstdc++ at gcc dot gnu dot org" <libstdc++ at gcc dot gnu dot org>, gcc-patches <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2018 10:42:20 +0000
Subject: Re: Fix hashtable memory leak
References: <c17eccff-db0f-4f0e-0f1c-45711e124ed5@gmail.com> <bfa0fbbc-488d-864e-3fa5-3544e1482de7@gmail.com> <20181126121233.GR28365@redhat.com> <d7093394-f8af-6c81-0262-afc593a31867@gmail.com> <20181127220041.GD809@redhat.com> <f8b5b5b3-945d-fe83-0aff-c5e725370fe2@gmail.com>

On 28/11/18 07:36 +0100, François Dumont wrote:

On 11/27/18 11:00 PM, Jonathan Wakely wrote:

On 27/11/18 22:31 +0100, François Dumont wrote:

I eventually called the new method _M_assign_elements.


Perfect.

And yes, tracker_allocator was enough.


Great.

Committed on trunk for the moment.


Great, thanks.

Please note that GCC 7.4 RC1 is scheduled for this week:
https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2018-11/msg00118.html

Will you be able to backport the simpler patch (without the
refactoring to remove code duplication) to the branch before then?

If not I can take care of it.

I just backport to gcc-7/8-branch the same patch.


Thanks!

References:
- Fix hashtable memory leak
  - From: François Dumont
- Re: Fix hashtable memory leak
  - From: François Dumont
- Re: Fix hashtable memory leak
  - From: Jonathan Wakely
- Re: Fix hashtable memory leak
  - From: François Dumont
- Re: Fix hashtable memory leak
  - From: Jonathan Wakely
- Re: Fix hashtable memory leak
  - From: François Dumont

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]