Closed
Bug 1138293
Opened 10 years ago
Closed 10 years ago
Replace moz_malloc/moz_free with malloc/free
Categories
(Core :: Memory Allocator, defect)
Core
Memory Allocator
Tracking
()
RESOLVED
FIXED
mozilla40
Tracking | Status | |
---|---|---|
firefox40 | --- | fixed |
People
(Reporter: glandium, Assigned: glandium)
References
Details
(Keywords: dev-doc-needed)
Attachments
(2 files)
(deleted),
patch
|
n.nethercote
:
review+
|
Details | Diff | Splinter Review |
(deleted),
patch
|
n.nethercote
:
review+
|
Details | Diff | Splinter Review |
The distinction between moz_malloc/moz_free and malloc/free is not interesting. We are inconsistent in our use of one or the other, and I wouldn't be surprised if we are mixing them anyways.
One difficulty is that things withing mozglue itself can't really use malloc/free verbatim because of how it's linked. See bug 868814 comment 10.
Comment 1•10 years ago
|
||
Didn't we make malloc() infallible?
Assignee | ||
Comment 2•10 years ago
|
||
Infallible is moz_xmalloc.
Assignee | ||
Comment 3•10 years ago
|
||
Attachment #8583707 -
Flags: review?(n.nethercote)
Assignee | ||
Comment 4•10 years ago
|
||
The problem from bug 868814 comment 10 still exists, but is more or less controlled with the changes in mozalloc.h. It won't prevent someone using malloc somehow in mozglue.dll, but I don't want to block this on waiting for a complete solution. And those should be easy to spot, as mozglue is a rather small surface, especially on Windows.
Attachment #8583708 -
Flags: review?(n.nethercote)
Comment 5•10 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 8583708 [details] [diff] [review]
Remove moz_malloc/moz_free/moz_realloc/moz_calloc
Review of attachment 8583708 [details] [diff] [review]:
-----------------------------------------------------------------
If you haven't done so already, please grep for any remaining mentions of the removed moz_ functions.
::: memory/mozalloc/mozalloc.h
@@ +67,5 @@
> + * Each declaration below is analogous to a "standard" allocation
> + * function, except that the out-of-memory handling is made explicit.
> + * The |moz_x| versions will never return a NULL pointer; if memory
> + * is exhausted, they abort. The |moz_| versions may return NULL
> + * pointers if memory is exhausted: their return value must be checked.
The second half of this comment should be modified or removed, because the moz_ versions no longer exist. Maybe change it to this:
"Each declaration below is analogous to a "standard" allocation function, except that it will never return a NULL pointer; if memory is exhausted, it will abort."
Attachment #8583708 -
Flags: review?(n.nethercote) → review+
Assignee | ||
Comment 6•10 years ago
|
||
(In reply to Nicholas Nethercote [:njn] from comment #5)
> Comment on attachment 8583708 [details] [diff] [review]
> Remove moz_malloc/moz_free/moz_realloc/moz_calloc
>
> Review of attachment 8583708 [details] [diff] [review]:
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>
> If you haven't done so already, please grep for any remaining mentions of
> the removed moz_ functions.
Did this every time I rebased this patch, and surprisingly, nothing piled up.
> ::: memory/mozalloc/mozalloc.h
> @@ +67,5 @@
> > + * Each declaration below is analogous to a "standard" allocation
> > + * function, except that the out-of-memory handling is made explicit.
> > + * The |moz_x| versions will never return a NULL pointer; if memory
> > + * is exhausted, they abort. The |moz_| versions may return NULL
> > + * pointers if memory is exhausted: their return value must be checked.
>
> The second half of this comment should be modified or removed, because the
> moz_ versions no longer exist. Maybe change it to this:
Actually, I left it on purpose, because there /still/ are a few moz_ functions.
Comment 7•10 years ago
|
||
Comment on attachment 8583707 [details] [diff] [review]
Use malloc/free/realloc/calloc instead of moz_malloc/moz_free/moz_realloc/moz_calloc
Review of attachment 8583707 [details] [diff] [review]:
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Please do a full try server run before landing these patches :)
::: dom/base/nsTextFragment.cpp
@@ +348,5 @@
> if (first16bit != -1) { // aBuffer contains no non-8bit character
> // The old data was 1-byte, but the new is not so we have to expand it
> // all to 2-byte
> + char16_t* buff = (char16_t*)malloc((mState.mLength + aLength) *
> + sizeof(char16_t));
I'd put the linebreak after the '=' and get the rest on a single line.
@@ +383,1 @@
> (mState.mLength + aLength) * sizeof(char));
Adjust indentation of second line.
::: dom/media/webrtc/AudioOutputObserver.h
@@ +51,5 @@
> nsAutoPtr<webrtc::SingleRwFifo> mPlayoutFifo;
> uint32_t mChunkSize;
>
> // chunking to 10ms support
> + FarEndAudioChunk *mSaved; // can't be nsAutoPtr since we need to use free()
Pre-existing, but can you add ", not delete" to the comment? Because I had to look at the definition of nsAutoPtr to understand this comment.
::: gfx/graphite2/src/MozGrMalloc.h
@@ +5,5 @@
>
> #ifndef MOZ_GR_MALLOC_H
> #define MOZ_GR_MALLOC_H
>
> +// Override malloc() and friends to call moz_xmalloc() etc, so that we get
Good catch!
::: gfx/skia/trunk/src/ports/SkMemory_mozalloc.cpp
@@ +39,1 @@
> }
It's weird that there aren't equivalent versions of this function for calloc and realloc. Hmm.
::: intl/uconv/nsScriptableUConv.cpp
@@ +150,5 @@
> rv = mDecoder->GetMaxLength(reinterpret_cast<const char*>(aData),
> inLength, &outLength);
> if (NS_SUCCEEDED(rv))
> {
> + char16_t* buf = (char16_t*)malloc((outLength+1)*sizeof(char16_t));
Might as well add whitespace around the '*' while you're here.
Attachment #8583707 -
Flags: review?(n.nethercote) → review+
Assignee | ||
Comment 8•10 years ago
|
||
Assignee | ||
Comment 9•10 years ago
|
||
I know at least those need an update:
https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Infallible_memory_allocation
https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Choosing_the_right_memory_allocator
But maybe they should be consolidated instead. Also, there is going to be more changes (like bug 1134920 and bug 1134923) that will need doc updates as well. I expect those to be landed during this cycle (40). Maybe it's worth waiting for documentation updates. Please contact me to discuss this.
Keywords: dev-doc-needed
Comment 10•10 years ago
|
||
https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/b5d54a547bdc
https://hg.mozilla.org/mozilla-central/rev/f2c533ee4071
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 10 years ago
status-firefox40:
--- → fixed
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Target Milestone: --- → mozilla40
Comment 11•10 years ago
|
||
A reviewer cited MDN as a reason for me to use moz_malloc -- which I couldn't do.
Can you please update these docs:
https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Infallible_memory_allocation
https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Choosing_the_right_memory_allocator
https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Mozilla/Tech/XPCOM/Reference/Interface/nsIMemory
and possibly others.
In addition to changing the function names, I think we need to re-visit the prose as well. For example, is |malloc| still expected to become "eventually fallible"?
Flags: needinfo?(mh+mozilla)
Comment 12•10 years ago
|
||
rather, "eventually infallible"
Assignee | ||
Comment 13•10 years ago
|
||
(In reply to David Major [:dmajor] from comment #11)
> Can you please update these docs:
> https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Infallible_memory_allocation
> https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Choosing_the_right_memory_allocator
> https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Mozilla/Tech/XPCOM/Reference/
> Interface/nsIMemory
> and possibly others.
See comment 9.
Flags: needinfo?(mh+mozilla) → needinfo?(eshepherd)
You need to log in
before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description
•