c pthreads + valgrind =內存泄漏：爲什麼？

Question

我開始使用C語言中的pthreads，並且我也是一個瘋狂的編寫我的代碼的「無bug」，儘可能的。

儘管試圖要格外小心，Valgrind是告訴我，我是泄漏內存，無論天氣：

1. 我創造，我完成後，加入可接合的線程（代碼片段）
2. 創建可連接我創建後脫離線程（代碼片段2）
3. 我創建超脫線程（代碼片段3）

我知道這已經討論（見this，this也this），但我仍然好奇：

某些運行我最終沒有錯誤
1. 爲什麼呢？
2. 爲什麼在處理分離的線程時似乎有一個隨機數的總體malloc（）？ < <答案由nos提供，代碼片段「固定」，並在主（）中添加延遲
3. 爲什麼即使在處理分離的線程時，「內存泄漏」仍然存在？ < <相同2.

正如我從以前的解答和Valgrind的跟蹤理解，在pthread_create（）是根本原因，根據需要延伸通過螺紋使用的堆棧，有時再利用它，從而幾個缺失釋放。但是不太清楚的是爲什麼它依賴於執行運行以及爲什麼它在創建分離線程時也會發生。正如我從某些答案，評論以及從該人那裏看到的，分離線程的資源將在線程完成時釋放。我已經嘗試過各種調整來解決這個問題（在每個線程結束之前，在主線程結束之前增加了睡眠時間，增加了堆棧大小，添加了更多「工作」......）但它並沒有改變最終結果很多。另外，爲什麼在處理分離的線程時會出現隨機數的「mallocs（）」，valgrind是否會失去一些分離的線程？這似乎也不依賴於堆棧大小。

提供的代碼是一個管理員/工作者模型的模擬示例，對於該模型，線程管理的joinable/join（）方法似乎更適合imho。

感謝您可能能夠提供的任何啓示！我也希望這些（過度評論）的代碼片段將有助於任何希望開始使用pthread的人。

- swappy

PS系統信息：在Debian 64位拱GCC

代碼段1（可接合的線程接合）：

/* Running this multiple times with valgrind, I sometimes end with : 
    - no errors (proper malloc/free balance) 
    - 4 extra malloc vs free (most frequently) 
    The number of mallocs() is more conservative and depends on the number of threads. 
*/ 

#include <stdlib.h>    /* EXIT_FAILURE, EXIT_SUCCESS macros & the likes */ 
#include <stdio.h>    /* printf() & the likes */ 
#include <pthread.h>   /* test subject */ 

#define MAX_THREADS 100   /* Number of threads */ 
pthread_attr_t tattr;   /* Thread attribute */ 
pthread_t workers[MAX_THREADS]; /* All the threads spawned by the main() thread */ 

/* A mock container structure to pass arguments around */ 
struct args_for_job_t { 
    int tid; 
    int status; 
}; 

/* The job each worker will perform upon creation */ 
void *job(void *arg) 
{ 
    /* Cast arguments in a proper container */ 
    struct args_for_job_t *container; 
    container = (struct args_for_job_t *)arg; 

    /* A mock job */ 
    printf("[TID - %d]\n", container->tid); 

    /* Properly exit with status code tid */ 
    pthread_exit((void *)(&container->status)); 
} 

int main() 
{ 
    int return_code;       /* Will hold return codes */ 
    void *return_status;      /* Will hold return status */ 
    int tid;         /* Thread id */ 
    struct args_for_job_t args[MAX_THREADS]; /* For thread safeness */ 

    /* Initialize and set thread joinable attribute */ 
    pthread_attr_init(&tattr); 
    pthread_attr_setdetachstate(&tattr, PTHREAD_CREATE_JOINABLE); 

    /* Spawn detached threads */ 
    for (tid = 0; tid < MAX_THREADS; tid++) 
    { 
     args[tid].tid = tid; 
     args[tid].status = tid; 
     return_code = pthread_create(&workers[tid], &tattr, job, (void *)(&args[tid])); 
     if (return_code != 0) { printf("[ERROR] Thread creation failed\n"); return EXIT_FAILURE; } 
    } 

    /* Free thread attribute */ 
    pthread_attr_destroy(&tattr); 

    /* Properly join() all workers before completion */ 
    for(tid = 0; tid < MAX_THREADS; tid++) 
    { 
     return_code = pthread_join(workers[tid], &return_status); 
     if (return_code != 0) 
     { 
      printf("[ERROR] Return code from pthread_join() is %d\n", return_code); 
      return EXIT_FAILURE; 
     } 
     printf("Thread %d joined with return status %d\n", tid, *(int *)return_status); 
    } 

    return EXIT_SUCCESS; 
} 

代碼段2（獨立的線程創建後）：

/* Running this multiple times with valgrind, I sometimes end with : 
    - no errors (proper malloc/free balance) 
    - 1 extra malloc vs free (most frequently) 
    Most surprisingly, it seems there is a random amount of overall mallocs 
*/ 

#include <stdlib.h>    /* EXIT_FAILURE, EXIT_SUCCESS macros & the likes */ 
#include <stdio.h>    /* printf() & the likes */ 
#include <pthread.h>   /* test subject */ 
#include <unistd.h>   

#define MAX_THREADS 100   /* Number of threads */ 
pthread_attr_t tattr;   /* Thread attribute */ 
pthread_t workers[MAX_THREADS]; /* All the threads spawned by the main() thread */ 

/* A mock container structure to pass arguments around */ 
struct args_for_job_t { 
    int tid; 
}; 

/* The job each worker will perform upon creation */ 
void *job(void *arg) 
{ 
    /* Cast arguments in a proper container */ 
    struct args_for_job_t *container; 
    container = (struct args_for_job_t *)arg; 

    /* A mock job */ 
    printf("[TID - %d]\n", container->tid); 

    /* For the sake of returning something, not necessary */ 
    return NULL; 
} 

int main() 
{ 
    int return_code;       /* Will hold return codes */ 
    int tid;         /* Thread id */ 
    struct args_for_job_t args[MAX_THREADS]; /* For thread safeness */ 

    /* Initialize and set thread joinable attribute */ 
    pthread_attr_init(&tattr); 
    pthread_attr_setdetachstate(&tattr, PTHREAD_CREATE_JOINABLE); 

    /* Spawn detached threads */ 
    for (tid = 0; tid < MAX_THREADS; tid++) 
    { 
     args[tid].tid = tid; 
     return_code = pthread_create(&workers[tid], &tattr, job, (void *)(&args[tid])); 
     if (return_code != 0) { printf("[ERROR] Thread creation failed\n"); return EXIT_FAILURE; } 
     /* Detach worker after creation */ 
     pthread_detach(workers[tid]); 
    } 

    /* Free thread attribute */ 
    pthread_attr_destroy(&tattr); 

    /* Delay main() completion until all detached threads finish their jobs. */ 
    usleep(100000); 
    return EXIT_SUCCESS; 
} 

代碼段3（在創建分離的線程）：

/* Running this multiple times with valgrind, I sometimes end with : 
    - no errors (proper malloc/free balance) 
    - 1 extra malloc vs free (most frequently) 
    Most surprisingly, it seems there is a random amount of overall mallocs 
*/ 

#include <stdlib.h>    /* EXIT_FAILURE, EXIT_SUCCESS macros & the likes */ 
#include <stdio.h>    /* printf() & the likes */ 
#include <pthread.h>   /* test subject */ 

#define MAX_THREADS 100   /* Number of threads */ 
pthread_attr_t tattr;   /* Thread attribute */ 
pthread_t workers[MAX_THREADS]; /* All the threads spawned by the main() thread */ 

/* A mock container structure to pass arguments around */ 
struct args_for_job_t { 
    int tid; 
}; 

/* The job each worker will perform upon creation */ 
void *job(void *arg) 
{ 
    /* Cast arguments in a proper container */ 
    struct args_for_job_t *container; 
    container = (struct args_for_job_t *)arg; 

    /* A mock job */ 
    printf("[TID - %d]\n", container->tid); 

    /* For the sake of returning something, not necessary */ 
    return NULL; 
} 

int main() 
{ 
    int return_code;       /* Will hold return codes */ 
    int tid;         /* Thread id */ 
    struct args_for_job_t args[MAX_THREADS]; /* For thread safeness */ 

    /* Initialize and set thread detached attribute */ 
    pthread_attr_init(&tattr); 
    pthread_attr_setdetachstate(&tattr, PTHREAD_CREATE_DETACHED); 

    /* Spawn detached threads */ 
    for (tid = 0; tid < MAX_THREADS; tid++) 
    { 
     args[tid].tid = tid; 
     return_code = pthread_create(&workers[tid], &tattr, job, (void *)(&args[tid])); 
     if (return_code != 0) { printf("[ERROR] Thread creation failed\n"); return EXIT_FAILURE; } 
    } 

    /* Free thread attribute */ 
    pthread_attr_destroy(&tattr); 

    /* Delay main() completion until all detached threads finish their jobs. */ 
    usleep(100000); 
    return EXIT_SUCCESS; 
} 

Valgrind的輸出的代碼段1（接合螺紋& MEM-泄漏）

==27802== 
==27802== HEAP SUMMARY: 
==27802==  in use at exit: 1,558 bytes in 4 blocks 
==27802== total heap usage: 105 allocs, 101 frees, 28,814 bytes allocated 
==27802== 
==27802== Searching for pointers to 4 not-freed blocks 
==27802== Checked 104,360 bytes 
==27802== 
==27802== 36 bytes in 1 blocks are still reachable in loss record 1 of 4 
==27802== at 0x4C2B6CD: malloc (in /usr/lib/valgrind/vgpreload_memcheck-amd64-linux.so) 
==27802== by 0x400894D: _dl_map_object (dl-load.c:162) 
==27802== by 0x401384A: dl_open_worker (dl-open.c:225) 
==27802== by 0x400F175: _dl_catch_error (dl-error.c:178) 
==27802== by 0x4013319: _dl_open (dl-open.c:639) 
==27802== by 0x517F601: do_dlopen (dl-libc.c:89) 
==27802== by 0x400F175: _dl_catch_error (dl-error.c:178) 
==27802== by 0x517F6C3: __libc_dlopen_mode (dl-libc.c:48) 
==27802== by 0x4E423BB: pthread_cancel_init (unwind-forcedunwind.c:53) 
==27802== by 0x4E4257B: _Unwind_ForcedUnwind (unwind-forcedunwind.c:130) 
==27802== by 0x4E4069F: __pthread_unwind (unwind.c:130) 
==27802== by 0x4E3AFF4: pthread_exit (pthreadP.h:265) 
==27802== 
==27802== 36 bytes in 1 blocks are still reachable in loss record 2 of 4 
==27802== at 0x4C2B6CD: malloc (in /usr/lib/valgrind/vgpreload_memcheck-amd64-linux.so) 
==27802== by 0x400B7EC: _dl_new_object (dl-object.c:161) 
==27802== by 0x4006805: _dl_map_object_from_fd (dl-load.c:1051) 
==27802== by 0x4008699: _dl_map_object (dl-load.c:2568) 
==27802== by 0x401384A: dl_open_worker (dl-open.c:225) 
==27802== by 0x400F175: _dl_catch_error (dl-error.c:178) 
==27802== by 0x4013319: _dl_open (dl-open.c:639) 
==27802== by 0x517F601: do_dlopen (dl-libc.c:89) 
==27802== by 0x400F175: _dl_catch_error (dl-error.c:178) 
==27802== by 0x517F6C3: __libc_dlopen_mode (dl-libc.c:48) 
==27802== by 0x4E423BB: pthread_cancel_init (unwind-forcedunwind.c:53) 
==27802== by 0x4E4257B: _Unwind_ForcedUnwind (unwind-forcedunwind.c:130) 
==27802== 
==27802== 312 bytes in 1 blocks are still reachable in loss record 3 of 4 
==27802== at 0x4C29DB4: calloc (in /usr/lib/valgrind/vgpreload_memcheck-amd64-linux.so) 
==27802== by 0x4010B59: _dl_check_map_versions (dl-version.c:300) 
==27802== by 0x4013E1F: dl_open_worker (dl-open.c:268) 
==27802== by 0x400F175: _dl_catch_error (dl-error.c:178) 
==27802== by 0x4013319: _dl_open (dl-open.c:639) 
==27802== by 0x517F601: do_dlopen (dl-libc.c:89) 
==27802== by 0x400F175: _dl_catch_error (dl-error.c:178) 
==27802== by 0x517F6C3: __libc_dlopen_mode (dl-libc.c:48) 
==27802== by 0x4E423BB: pthread_cancel_init (unwind-forcedunwind.c:53) 
==27802== by 0x4E4257B: _Unwind_ForcedUnwind (unwind-forcedunwind.c:130) 
==27802== by 0x4E4069F: __pthread_unwind (unwind.c:130) 
==27802== by 0x4E3AFF4: pthread_exit (pthreadP.h:265) 
==27802== 
==27802== 1,174 bytes in 1 blocks are still reachable in loss record 4 of 4 
==27802== at 0x4C29DB4: calloc (in /usr/lib/valgrind/vgpreload_memcheck-amd64-linux.so) 
==27802== by 0x400B57D: _dl_new_object (dl-object.c:77) 
==27802== by 0x4006805: _dl_map_object_from_fd (dl-load.c:1051) 
==27802== by 0x4008699: _dl_map_object (dl-load.c:2568) 
==27802== by 0x401384A: dl_open_worker (dl-open.c:225) 
==27802== by 0x400F175: _dl_catch_error (dl-error.c:178) 
==27802== by 0x4013319: _dl_open (dl-open.c:639) 
==27802== by 0x517F601: do_dlopen (dl-libc.c:89) 
==27802== by 0x400F175: _dl_catch_error (dl-error.c:178) 
==27802== by 0x517F6C3: __libc_dlopen_mode (dl-libc.c:48) 
==27802== by 0x4E423BB: pthread_cancel_init (unwind-forcedunwind.c:53) 
==27802== by 0x4E4257B: _Unwind_ForcedUnwind (unwind-forcedunwind.c:130) 
==27802== 
==27802== LEAK SUMMARY: 
==27802== definitely lost: 0 bytes in 0 blocks 
==27802== indirectly lost: 0 bytes in 0 blocks 
==27802==  possibly lost: 0 bytes in 0 blocks 
==27802== still reachable: 1,558 bytes in 4 blocks 
==27802==   suppressed: 0 bytes in 0 blocks 
==27802== 
==27802== ERROR SUMMARY: 0 errors from 0 contexts (suppressed: 2 from 2) 
--27802-- 
--27802-- used_suppression:  2 dl-hack3-cond-1 
==27802== 
==27802== ERROR SUMMARY: 0 errors from 0 contexts (suppressed: 2 from 2) 

Valgrind的輸出的代碼段1（沒有內存泄漏，稍後幾次運行）

--29170-- Discarding syms at 0x64168d0-0x6426198 in /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libgcc_s.so.1 due to munmap() 
==29170== 
==29170== HEAP SUMMARY: 
==29170==  in use at exit: 0 bytes in 0 blocks 
==29170== total heap usage: 105 allocs, 105 frees, 28,814 bytes allocated 
==29170== 
==29170== All heap blocks were freed -- no leaks are possible 
==29170== 
==29170== ERROR SUMMARY: 0 errors from 0 contexts (suppressed: 2 from 2) 
--29170-- 
--29170-- used_suppression:  2 dl-hack3-cond-1 
==29170== 
==29170== ERROR SUMMARY: 0 errors from 0 contexts (suppressed: 2 from 2) 

Answer 1

當你的線程被分離時，你有一個錯誤，導致未定義的行爲。

在主你有這行代碼：

struct args_for_job_t args[MAX_THREADS]; 

你的手指針到您的工作線程。

然後主（）達到此部分

pthread_exit(NULL); 

而且main（）中不再存在，但你仍然可以有大約工作者線程訪問上述args陣列是在堆棧上的main（） - 這已經不存在了。 您的工作線程可能會在main（）在某些運行中結束之前完成，但在其他運行中不會結束。