Re: libstdc++/4219: stl_alloc using -D__USE_MALLOC fails

Re: libstdc++/4219: stl_alloc using -D__USE_MALLOC fails

[ljrittle]

Synopsis: stl_alloc using -D__USE_MALLOC fails

State-Changed-From-To: feedback->closed
State-Changed-By: ljrittle
State-Changed-When: Thu Nov 15 00:48:01 2001
State-Changed-Why:
    Patch applied to mainline.

http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/gnatsweb.pl?cmd=view%20audit-trail&pr=4219&database=gcc

Re: libstdc++/4219: stl_alloc using -D__USE_MALLOC fails

[ljrittle]

The following reply was made to PR libstdc++/4219; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: ljrittle@gcc.gnu.org
To: bjornw@planetarion.com, gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org, gcc-gnats@gcc.gnu.org,
  gcc-prs@gcc.gnu.org, ljrittle@gcc.gnu.org
Cc:  
Subject: Re: libstdc++/4219: stl_alloc using -D__USE_MALLOC fails
Date: 15 Nov 2001 08:48:02 -0000

 Synopsis: stl_alloc using -D__USE_MALLOC fails
 
 State-Changed-From-To: feedback->closed
 State-Changed-By: ljrittle
 State-Changed-When: Thu Nov 15 00:48:01 2001
 State-Changed-Why:
     Patch applied to mainline.
 
 http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/gnatsweb.pl?cmd=view%20audit-trail&pr=4219&database=gcc

Re: libstdc++/4219: stl_alloc using -D__USE_MALLOC fails

[ljrittle]

Synopsis: stl_alloc using -D__USE_MALLOC fails

Responsible-Changed-From-To: unassigned->ljrittle
Responsible-Changed-By: ljrittle
Responsible-Changed-When: Tue Sep  4 14:02:27 2001
Responsible-Changed-Why:
    Look like mine.
State-Changed-From-To: open->feedback
State-Changed-By: ljrittle
State-Changed-When: Tue Sep  4 14:02:27 2001
State-Changed-Why:
    BTW, I think it would be a good idea to make the
    change you spotted.
    
    Is there a reason why you can't follow this advice on
    the new way to use the malloc interface in your application
    (from ./include/bits/c++config but see the primary
    documentation on the matter as well):
    
    // Default to the typically high-speed, pool-based allocator (as
    // libstdc++-v2) instead of the malloc-based allocator (libstdc++-v3
    // snapshots).  See libstdc++-v3/docs/html/17_intro/howto.html for
    // details on why you don't want to override this setting.  Ensure
    // that threads are properly configured on your platform before
    // assigning blame to the STL container-memory allocator.  After doing
    // so, please report any possible issues to libstdc++@gcc.gnu.org .
    // Do not blindly #define __USE_MALLOC here or on the command line.
    
    The problem with users defining __USE_MALLOC on the command
    line is that it is a subtle ABI change that may cause you
    problems...

http://gcc.gnu.org/cgi-bin/gnatsweb.pl?cmd=view&pr=4219&database=gcc

libstdc++/4219: stl_alloc using -D__USE_MALLOC fails

[bjornw]

>Number:         4219
>Category:       libstdc++
>Synopsis:       stl_alloc using -D__USE_MALLOC fails
>Confidential:   no
>Severity:       critical
>Priority:       medium
>Responsible:    unassigned
>State:          open
>Class:          sw-bug
>Submitter-Id:   net
>Arrival-Date:   Tue Sep 04 01:46:00 PDT 2001
>Closed-Date:
>Last-Modified:
>Originator:     bjornw@planetarion.com
>Release:        gcc version 3.1 20010901 (experimental)
>Organization:
>Environment:
redhat-6.2 (all pacthed up june 2001), kernel-2.4.9
>Description:
I have a heavy multithreaded application (database server proxy with connection pooling) using stl and friends. Historically gcc-2 leaked memory while using builtin memory allocation scheme. Using -D__USE_MALLOC enforcing simple memory allocation classes was the only way to make my servers live for more than 5 minutes without eating up 500MB RAM.

g++ fails to compile anything cause a bug in stl_alloc.h
>How-To-Repeat:
Compile a program using -D__USE_MALLOC
>Fix:
stl_alloc.h: 258

Original code:
# ifdef __USE_MALLOC
typedef malloc_alloc alloc;# ifdef __USE_MALLOC
typedef malloc_alloc single_client_alloc;
#else

Change this into:
# ifdef __USE_MALLOC
typedef __mem_interface alloc;
typedef __mem_interface single_client_alloc;
# else
>Release-Note:
>Audit-Trail:
>Unformatted: