[PATCH 10/21] PR jit/63854: Fix leak of worklist within jit-recording.c

[Richard Biener]

On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 9:02 PM, David Malcolm <dmalcolm@redhat.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 2014-11-19 at 09:59 -0700, Jeff Law wrote:
>> On 11/19/14 03:46, David Malcolm wrote:
>> > Fix this leak:
>> >
>> > 160 bytes in 5 blocks are definitely lost in loss record 154 of 228
>> >     at 0x4A0645D: malloc (in /usr/lib64/valgrind/vgpreload_memcheck-amd64-linux.so)
>> >     by 0x5D75D4F: xrealloc (xmalloc.c:177)
>> >     by 0x4DE1710: void va_heap::reserve<gcc::jit::recording::block*>(vec<gcc::jit::recording::block*, va_heap, vl_embed>*&, unsigned int, bool) (vec.h:310)
>> >     by 0x4DDFAB5: vec<gcc::jit::recording::block*, va_heap, vl_ptr>::reserve(unsigned int, bool) (vec.h:1428)
>> >     by 0x4DDFBFC: vec<gcc::jit::recording::block*, va_heap, vl_ptr>::reserve_exact(unsigned int) (vec.h:1448)
>> >     by 0x4DDE588: vec<gcc::jit::recording::block*, va_heap, vl_ptr>::create(unsigned int) (vec.h:1463)
>> >     by 0x4DD9B9F: gcc::jit::recording::function::validate() (jit-recording.c:2191)
>> >     by 0x4DD7AD3: gcc::jit::recording::context::validate() (jit-recording.c:1005)
>> >     by 0x4DD7660: gcc::jit::recording::context::compile() (jit-recording.c:848)
>> >     by 0x4DD5BD2: gcc_jit_context_compile (libgccjit.c:2014)
>> >     by 0x401CA4: test_jit (harness.h:190)
>> >     by 0x401D88: main (harness.h:232)
>> >
>> > gcc/jit/ChangeLog:
>> >     PR jit/63854
>> >     * jit-recording.c (recording::function::validate): Convert
>> >     "worklist" from vec<> to autovec<> to fix a leak.
>> JIT space, yours to approve :-)  We haven't formalized that yet, but
>> it'd be silly to do anything else.
>
> FWIW, I added myself to the MAINTAINERS file as JIT maintainer as part
> of a change you reviewed as:
>   https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/jit/2014-q4/msg00029.html
>
> Is there a governance distinction here, between patch review vs
> decisions of the steering committee?  i.e. do changes to the maintainers
> part of the MAINTAINERS file require higher-level approval?

Yes, reviewers and maintainers are appointed by the steering commitee only.

Richard.

> Presumably I should continue to send (non-trivial) jit patches to this
> list and wait for review before committing to trunk?
>
>> Anyway so formally, this is OK for the trunk.
>
> Thanks.
>