On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 10:04 PM, Travis E. Oliphant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Charles R Harris wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 9:15 PM, Travis E. Oliphant > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote: > > > > Michael Abbott wrote: > > > Only half of my patch for this bug has gone into trunk, and > > without the > > > rest of my patch there remains a leak. > > > > > Thanks for your work Michael. I've been so grateful to have you and > > Chuck and others looking carefully at the code to fix its problems. > > > > In this particular case, I'm not sure I see how (the rest of) your > > patch > > fixes any remaining leak. We do seem to be having a disagreement > > about > > whether or not the reference to typecode can be pre-maturely > > destroyed, > > but this doesn't fit what I usually call a "memory leak." I think > > there may be some other cause for remaining leaks. > > > > > > Travis, > > > > There really is (at least) one reference counting error in > > PyArray_FromAny. In particular, the obj == NULL case leaves a > > reference to typecode, then exits through the first return after > > finish. In this case robj doesn't steal a reference to typecode and > > the result can be seen in the python program above or by printing out > > the typecode->ob_refcnt from the code itself. So that needs fixing. I > > would suggest a DECREF in that section and a direct return of robj. > agreed! I'll commit the change. > > > > The next section before finish is also a bit odd. The direct return of > > an array works fine, but if that isn't the branch taken, then > > PyArray_Return decrements the refcnt of arr, which in turn decrements > > the refcnt of typecode. I don't know if the resulting scalar holds a > > reference to typecode, but in any case the situation there should also > > be clarified. > This looks fine to me. At the PyArray_Return call, the typecode > reference is held by the array. When it is decref'd the typecode is > decref'd appropriately as well. The resulting scalar does *not* > contain a reference to typecode. The scalar C-structure has no place to > put it (it's just a PyObject_HEAD and the memory for the scalar value). > I was thinking of just pulling the relevant part out of PyArray_Return and including it in the function, which would make what was going on quite explicit to anyone reading the code. Then maybe a direct return of robj as I think it is always going to be a scalar at that point. > Michael is correct that PyArray_Scalar does not change the reference > count of typecode (as the comments above that function indicates). I > tried to be careful to put comments near the functions that deal with > PyArray_Descr objects to describe how they affect reference counting. I > also thought I put that in my book. > Yep, it was a brain fart on my part. Chuck
_______________________________________________ Numpy-discussion mailing list Numpy-discussion@scipy.org http://projects.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion
