Philippe Waroquiers noticed a memory leak in gdb, which he tracked
down to a bug in splay-tree.  splay_tree_remove does not call the
`delete_key' function when it removes the old node; but it should.

I looked at every splay tree in GCC and there is only one that passes
a non-NULL delete function -- the one in lto.c.  That file does not
call splay_tree_remove.  So, I think this is safe to check in.

I re-ran the LTO tests to double check.

libiberty/
        * splay-tree.c (splay_tree_remove): Delete the key if necessary.
---
 libiberty/ChangeLog    | 4 ++++
 libiberty/splay-tree.c | 2 ++
 2 files changed, 6 insertions(+)

diff --git a/libiberty/ChangeLog b/libiberty/ChangeLog
index bcc0227bdd8..1eb25f928f2 100644
--- a/libiberty/ChangeLog
+++ b/libiberty/ChangeLog
@@ -1,3 +1,7 @@
+2019-01-18  Tom Tromey  <t...@tromey.com>
+
+       * splay-tree.c (splay_tree_remove): Delete the key if necessary.
+
 2019-01-14  Tom Honermann  <t...@honermann.net>
 
        * cp-demangle.c (cplus_demangle_builtin_types)
diff --git a/libiberty/splay-tree.c b/libiberty/splay-tree.c
index 920e68db2cb..21d23c38dfc 100644
--- a/libiberty/splay-tree.c
+++ b/libiberty/splay-tree.c
@@ -425,6 +425,8 @@ splay_tree_remove (splay_tree sp, splay_tree_key key)
       right = sp->root->right;
 
       /* Delete the root node itself.  */
+      if (sp->delete_key)
+       (*sp->delete_key) (sp->root->key);
       if (sp->delete_value)
        (*sp->delete_value) (sp->root->value);
       (*sp->deallocate) (sp->root, sp->allocate_data);
-- 
2.17.2

Reply via email to