https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=65538
Bug ID: 65538
Summary: [5 Regression] Memory leak of ipa_node_params_sum
elements
Product: gcc
Version: 5.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: normal
Priority: P3
Component: tree-optimization
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: jakub at gcc dot gnu.org
CC: hubicka at gcc dot gnu.org, marxin at gcc dot gnu.org
Seen recently in valgrind output (e.g. on the pr65533.c testcase):
==19246== 216 (48 direct, 168 indirect) bytes in 1 blocks are definitely lost
in loss record 501 of 594
==19246== at 0x4A070D7: operator new(unsigned long) (in
/usr/lib64/valgrind/vgpreload_memcheck-amd64-linux.so)
==19246== by 0xAEBAAE: function_summary<ipa_node_params*>::allocate_new()
(symbol-summary.h:106)
==19246== by 0xAEAF20: function_summary<ipa_node_params*>::get(int)
(symbol-summary.h:232)
==19246== by 0xAE9B97: function_summary<ipa_node_params*>::get(cgraph_node*)
(symbol-summary.h:112)
==19246== by 0xAF9C38: ipa_analyze_node(cgraph_node*) (ipa-prop.c:2386)
==19246== by 0x15B5578: ipcp_generate_summary() (ipa-cp.c:4449)
==19246== by 0xC255AF: execute_ipa_summary_passes(ipa_opt_pass_d*)
(passes.c:2154)
==19246== by 0x841202: ipa_passes() (cgraphunit.c:2179)
==19246== by 0x8415E5: symbol_table::compile() (cgraphunit.c:2295)
==19246== by 0x841907: symbol_table::finalize_compilation_unit()
(cgraphunit.c:2444)
==19246== by 0x69CEB8: c_write_global_declarations() (c-decl.c:10801)
==19246== by 0xD1EBAC: compile_file() (toplev.c:608)
==19246==
==19246== 384 (192 direct, 192 indirect) bytes in 4 blocks are definitely lost
in loss record 519 of 594
==19246== at 0x4A070D7: operator new(unsigned long) (in
/usr/lib64/valgrind/vgpreload_memcheck-amd64-linux.so)
==19246== by 0xAEBAAE: function_summary<ipa_node_params*>::allocate_new()
(symbol-summary.h:106)
==19246== by 0xAEAF20: function_summary<ipa_node_params*>::get(int)
(symbol-summary.h:232)
==19246== by 0xAE9B97: function_summary<ipa_node_params*>::get(cgraph_node*)
(symbol-summary.h:112)
==19246== by 0xAF42FC: ipa_initialize_node_params(cgraph_node*)
(ipa-prop.c:293)
==19246== by 0xAE323D: estimate_function_body_sizes(cgraph_node*, bool)
(ipa-inline-analysis.c:2518)
==19246== by 0xAE4F54: compute_inline_parameters(cgraph_node*, bool)
(ipa-inline-analysis.c:2951)
==19246== by 0xAE5051: compute_inline_parameters_for_current()
(ipa-inline-analysis.c:2978)
==19246== by 0xAE50D8: (anonymous
namespace)::pass_inline_parameters::execute(function*)
(ipa-inline-analysis.c:3008)
==19246== by 0xC25B24: execute_one_pass(opt_pass*) (passes.c:2328)
==19246== by 0xC25D5E: execute_pass_list_1(opt_pass*) (passes.c:2380)
==19246== by 0xC25DCC: execute_pass_list(function*, opt_pass*)
(passes.c:2391)
inline summaries are ggc allocated and so not a problem, but the ipa-prop
summaries are not, and thus something should arrange that the ipa_node_params
class objects allocated by allocate_new are destructed when m_map is
destructed.
So, perhaps summary_hashmap_traits needs to implement the remove template
method? Though, it is unclear how it could find out if the hash_map is ggc or
not. Perhaps the decision ggc vs. non-ggc should be done as function_summary
template parameter or similar.
