~vector() causes SIGSEGV when exit - c++

Thats the Store Credit problem on Google code jam.
https://code.google.com/codejam/contest/351101/dashboard#s=p0
My code gives out a SIGSEGV after running the large test. But the answer is correct!
#include <cstdio>
#include <algorithm>
#include <vector>
using namespace std;
int ps[1000]={0};
vector<int> indice[1000];
int main() {
int cases; scanf("%d", &cases);
for(int j=1;j<=cases;j++) {
printf("Case #%d: ", j);
int c, is; scanf("%d%d", &c, &is);
for(int i=0;i<=c;i++) ps[i]=0;
for(int i=0;i<=c;i++) indice[i].clear();
for (int i = 0; i < is; i++) {
int it; scanf("%d", &it);
indice[it].push_back(i+1);
ps[it]=1;
if (c-it>0&&ps[c-it]) {
int a, b;
a = indice[it][0];
b = indice[c-it][0];
if(c==2*it&&indice[it].size()>1) {
b=indice[it][1];
}
if (a!=b) {
printf("%d %d\n", min(a,b),max(a,b));
}
}
}
}
return 0;
}
So I use valgrind to find out what's going on .. but it seems that it's not my problem.
==17599== Invalid free() / delete / delete[] / realloc()
==17599== at 0x4C2A4BC: operator delete(void*) (in /usr/lib/valgrind/vgpreload_memcheck-amd64-linux.so)
==17599== by 0x401669: __gnu_cxx::new_allocator<int>::deallocate(int*, unsigned long) (new_allocator.h:98)
==17599== by 0x4013CD: std::_Vector_base<int, std::allocator<int> >::_M_deallocate(int*, unsigned long) (stl_vector.h:156)
==17599== by 0x400F60: std::_Vector_base<int, std::allocator<int> >::~_Vector_base() (stl_vector.h:142)
==17599== by 0x400D8D: std::vector<int, std::allocator<int> >::~vector() (stl_vector.h:351)
==17599== by 0x400C48: __tcf_0 (a.cpp:6)
==17599== by 0x5383900: __run_exit_handlers (exit.c:78)
==17599== by 0x5383984: exit (exit.c:100)
==17599== by 0x5369773: (below main) (libc-start.c:258)
==17599== Address 0x1 is not stack'd, malloc'd or (recently) free'd
==17599==
==17599==
==17599== HEAP SUMMARY:
==17599== in use at exit: 128 bytes in 1 blocks
==17599== total heap usage: 4,527 allocs, 4,527 frees, 113,664 bytes allocated
==17599==
==17599== LEAK SUMMARY:
==17599== definitely lost: 0 bytes in 0 blocks
==17599== indirectly lost: 0 bytes in 0 blocks
==17599== possibly lost: 0 bytes in 0 blocks
==17599== still reachable: 128 bytes in 1 blocks
==17599== suppressed: 0 bytes in 0 blocks
==17599== Rerun with --leak-check=full to see details of leaked memory
==17599==
==17599== For counts of detected and suppressed errors, rerun with: -v
==17599== ERROR SUMMARY: 1 errors from 1 contexts (suppressed: 2 from 2)
I'm so confused... Could anybody tell me what's going on? I'm a newbie of C++ ..
Thank you very much.

As I understand valgrind, it can't detect that you are writing outside of the bounds of arrays that are staticly allocated. So let's allocate them on the heap.
vector<int> *indice = new vector<int>[1000];
int *ps = new int[1000];
Then, you will see errors come out of valgrind. Including:
==7168== Invalid read of size 8
==7168== at 0x4008D6: main (stl_vector.h:735)
==7168== Address 0x4c39e10 is 8 bytes after a block of size 24,008 alloc'd
==7168== at 0x4A07152: operator new[](unsigned long) (vg_replace_malloc.c:363)
==7168== by 0x400791: global constructors keyed to indice (foo.cc:6)
==7168== by 0x400C35: ??? (in /tmp/foo)
==7168== by 0x4005F2: ??? (in /tmp/foo)
==7168==
==7168== Invalid read of size 8
==7168== at 0x4008DA: main (stl_vector.h:735)
==7168== Address 0x4c39e18 is 16 bytes after a block of size 24,008 alloc'd
==7168== at 0x4A07152: operator new[](unsigned long) (vg_replace_malloc.c:363)
==7168== by 0x400791: global constructors keyed to indice (foo.cc:6)
==7168== by 0x400C35: ??? (in /tmp/foo)
==7168== by 0x4005F2: ??? (in /tmp/foo)
==7168==
And using gdb, I can see that the SIGSEGV occurs when you access indice[1433], which is outside of the bounds of indice.
I also imagine that your actual issue is that for the large dataset, the variables bounds are listed as:
N = 50
3 ≤ I ≤ 2000
Are you sure you shouldn't be allocating 2001 elements, instead of 1000?

Related

C++ Memory leak issue

I am trying to find a memory leak in my code but for the life of me, I cannot figure out or identify the reason for this leak. Which is why I am reaching out to your all. Thanks in advance.
The following code, creates a kerberos cache from keytab. The code is an extract of a bigger code, but this also has the same memory leak. The full code is as following
#include <iostream>
#include <cstring>
#include <krb5/krb5.h>
bool renew(krb5_context &_ctx, krb5_keytab &_keytab, krb5_ccache &_cache, std::string &_principal)
{
long int retval;
bool success = false;
krb5_principal principal;
krb5_creds *creds;
if ((retval = krb5_parse_name(_ctx, _principal.c_str(), &principal)))
throw "cannot parse principal string";
creds = (krb5_creds*) malloc(sizeof(*creds));
memset(creds, 0, sizeof(creds));
if ((retval = krb5_get_init_creds_keytab(_ctx, creds, principal, _keytab, 0, NULL, NULL)))
{
free(creds);
krb5_free_principal(_ctx, principal);
throw "cannot initialize keytab credentials - ";
}
if ((retval = krb5_cc_initialize(_ctx, _cache, principal)))
{
free(creds);
krb5_free_principal(_ctx, principal);
throw " cannot initialize cache - ";
}
if ((retval = krb5_cc_store_cred(_ctx, _cache, creds)))
{
free(creds);
krb5_free_principal(_ctx, principal);
throw "cannot store credentials - ";
}
free(creds);
krb5_free_principal(_ctx, principal);
return success;
}
int main()
{
long int retval;
std::string _keytab_file, _cache_file, _realm, _principal;
krb5_context _ctx = NULL;
krb5_keytab _keytab = NULL;
krb5_ccache _cache = NULL;
_keytab_file = "/location/to/the/keytab/file";
_cache_file = "/location/to/the/cache/file";
_principal = "user.name#DOMAIN.COM";
if ((retval = krb5_init_context(&_ctx)))
throw "cannot initialize context";
if ((retval = krb5_kt_resolve(_ctx, _keytab_file.c_str(), &_keytab)))
throw "cannot resolve keytab";
if ((retval = krb5_cc_resolve(_ctx, _cache_file.c_str(), &_cache)))
throw "cannot open/initialize kerberos cache";
try {
renew(_ctx, _keytab, _cache, _principal);
} catch (std::exception &e) {
std::cerr<<e.what()<<std::endl;
}
bailout:
if (_cache)
krb5_cc_close(_ctx, _cache);
if (_keytab)
krb5_kt_close(_ctx, _keytab);
if (_ctx)
krb5_free_context(_ctx);
return 0;
}
in a linux (or similar) box following used to compile and run with valgrind to check memory leak
g++ krb.cpp -o krb -lkrb5 -g
valgrind --leak-check=full ./krb
the valgrind report is as following-
==257623==
==257623== HEAP SUMMARY:
==257623== in use at exit: 4,964 bytes in 19 blocks
==257623== total heap usage: 9,165 allocs, 9,146 frees, 3,702,330 bytes allocated
==257623==
==257623== 16 bytes in 1 blocks are definitely lost in loss record 6 of 14
==257623== at 0x4C37135: malloc (vg_replace_malloc.c:381)
==257623== by 0x5E31F8D: krb5int_c_copy_keyblock_contents (in /usr/lib64/libk5crypto.so.3.1)
==257623== by 0x4E91146: ??? (in /usr/lib64/libkrb5.so.3.3)
==257623== by 0x4E9C65B: ??? (in /usr/lib64/libkrb5.so.3.3)
==257623== by 0x4E9C6F5: krb5_get_init_creds_keytab (in /usr/lib64/libkrb5.so.3.3)
==257623== by 0x4012EF: renew(_krb5_context*&, _krb5_kt*&, _krb5_ccache*&, std::__cxx11::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> >&) (krb.cpp:25)
==257623== by 0x401612: main (krb.cpp:76)
==257623==
==257623== 78 (40 direct, 38 indirect) bytes in 1 blocks are definitely lost in loss record 8 of 14
==257623== at 0x4C37135: malloc (vg_replace_malloc.c:381)
==257623== by 0x4E91574: krb5_copy_principal (in /usr/lib64/libkrb5.so.3.3)
==257623== by 0x4E910EB: ??? (in /usr/lib64/libkrb5.so.3.3)
==257623== by 0x4E9C65B: ??? (in /usr/lib64/libkrb5.so.3.3)
==257623== by 0x4E9C6F5: krb5_get_init_creds_keytab (in /usr/lib64/libkrb5.so.3.3)
==257623== by 0x4012EF: renew(_krb5_context*&, _krb5_kt*&, _krb5_ccache*&, std::__cxx11::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> >&) (krb.cpp:25)
==257623== by 0x401612: main (krb.cpp:76)
==257623==
==257623== 97 (40 direct, 57 indirect) bytes in 1 blocks are definitely lost in loss record 9 of 14
==257623== at 0x4C37135: malloc (vg_replace_malloc.c:381)
==257623== by 0x4E91574: krb5_copy_principal (in /usr/lib64/libkrb5.so.3.3)
==257623== by 0x4E9112F: ??? (in /usr/lib64/libkrb5.so.3.3)
==257623== by 0x4E9C65B: ??? (in /usr/lib64/libkrb5.so.3.3)
==257623== by 0x4E9C6F5: krb5_get_init_creds_keytab (in /usr/lib64/libkrb5.so.3.3)
==257623== by 0x4012EF: renew(_krb5_context*&, _krb5_kt*&, _krb5_ccache*&, std::__cxx11::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> >&) (krb.cpp:25)
==257623== by 0x401612: main (krb.cpp:76)
==257623==
==257623== 1,646 bytes in 1 blocks are definitely lost in loss record 13 of 14
==257623== at 0x4C37135: malloc (vg_replace_malloc.c:381)
==257623== by 0x4E91369: krb5int_copy_data_contents (in /usr/lib64/libkrb5.so.3.3)
==257623== by 0x4E913EB: krb5_copy_data (in /usr/lib64/libkrb5.so.3.3)
==257623== by 0x4E91198: ??? (in /usr/lib64/libkrb5.so.3.3)
==257623== by 0x4E9C65B: ??? (in /usr/lib64/libkrb5.so.3.3)
==257623== by 0x4E9C6F5: krb5_get_init_creds_keytab (in /usr/lib64/libkrb5.so.3.3)
==257623== by 0x4012EF: renew(_krb5_context*&, _krb5_kt*&, _krb5_ccache*&, std::__cxx11::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> >&) (krb.cpp:25)
==257623== by 0x401612: main (krb.cpp:76)
==257623==
==257623== LEAK SUMMARY:
==257623== definitely lost: 1,742 bytes in 4 blocks
==257623== indirectly lost: 95 bytes in 7 blocks
==257623== possibly lost: 0 bytes in 0 blocks
==257623== still reachable: 3,127 bytes in 8 blocks
==257623== suppressed: 0 bytes in 0 blocks
==257623== Reachable blocks (those to which a pointer was found) are not shown.
==257623== To see them, rerun with: --leak-check=full --show-leak-kinds=all
==257623==
==257623== For lists of detected and suppressed errors, rerun with: -s
==257623== ERROR SUMMARY: 4 errors from 4 contexts (suppressed: 0 from 0)
looking forward to your input :)

C++ memory leak. Valgrind - mismatched delete

I receive objects from Thread #1 - its a 3rd party lib code - my callback called on it.
Objects have fixed-length string fields wrapped:
typedef struct somestr_t {
char * Data;
int Len; } somestr_t;
I have to create copy of the objects by hand every time, before I can pass it further to my code. So amongst other things I copy these strings too using this helper:
inline void CopyStr(somestr_t * dest, somestr_t * src)
{
if (src->Len == 0) {
dest->Len = 0;
return;
}
char* data = new char[src->Len];
memcpy(data, src->Data, src->Len);
dest->Data = data;
dest->Len = src->Len;
}
Then somewhere down the road I delete the object and its string fields:
if (someobj != nullptr)
{
if (someobj ->somestr.Len != 0) delete someobj ->somestr.Data;
. . .
delete someobj ;
}
When I run valgrind I get these in places where I would expect the strings to be deleted:
==33332== Mismatched free() / delete / delete []
==33332== at 0x48478DD: operator delete(void*, unsigned long) (vg_replace_malloc.c:935)
==33332== by 0x41B517: cleanup() (Recorder.cpp:86)
==33332== by 0x41BB29: signal_callback(int) (Recorder.cpp:129)
==33332== by 0x4C11DAF: ??? (in /usr/lib64/libc.so.6)
==33332== by 0x4CD14D4: clock_nanosleep##GLIBC_2.17 (clock_nanosleep.c:48)
==33332== by 0x4CD6086: nanosleep (nanosleep.c:25)
==33332== by 0x4D02DE8: usleep (usleep.c:32)
==33332== by 0x41C3EF: Logger(void*) (LogThreads.h:28)
==33332== by 0x4C5C6C9: start_thread (pthread_create.c:443)
==33332== by 0x4BFC2B3: clone (clone.S:100)
==33332== Address 0xd661260 is 0 bytes inside a block of size 12 alloc'd
==33332== at 0x484622F: operator new[](unsigned long) (vg_replace_malloc.c:640)
==33332== by 0x419E72: CopyStr (CbOverrides.h:23)
and summary report:
==34077== HEAP SUMMARY:
==34077== in use at exit: 328,520 bytes in 3,828 blocks
==34077== total heap usage: 124,774 allocs, 120,946 frees, 559,945,294 bytes allocated
==34077==
==34077== LEAK SUMMARY:
==34077== definitely lost: 0 bytes in 0 blocks
==34077== indirectly lost: 0 bytes in 0 blocks
==34077== possibly lost: 0 bytes in 0 blocks
==34077== still reachable: 328,520 bytes in 3,828 blocks
==34077== suppressed: 0 bytes in 0 blocks
I never used valgrind (or any c++ tool) before so I am not sure - why mismatch delete is reported? why there are 328K unreleased memory on exit?
char* data = new char[src->Len];
and
if (someobj ->somestr.Len != 0) delete someobj ->somestr.Data;
That delete should be delete [].
Why are there still reachable: 425,333 bytes in 3,860 blocks. Sorry, my crystal ball isn't working.
Normally Valgrind does give a hint as to what you need to do
==19283== Rerun with --leak-check=full to see details of leaked memory
It's a little bit mean in that after you've done that it will tell you about another option
==21816== Reachable blocks (those to which a pointer was found) are not shown.
==21816== To see them, rerun with: --leak-check=full --show-leak-kinds=all
Try those and start working through the non-freed memory.

Why does this Deque destructor have memory leak

I use doubly linked list to implement Deque in C++.
Destructor:
Deque::~Deque()
{
while (this->left_p)
{
node *temp = this->left_p;
this->left_p = this->left_p->next;
delete temp;
}
this->right_p = NULL;
}
when i use valgrind --leak-check=full ./a.out to check memory leak just to test my destructor` I got the following output:
==2636==
==2636== HEAP SUMMARY:
==2636== in use at exit: 72,704 bytes in 1 blocks
==2636== total heap usage: 1,003 allocs, 1,002 frees, 97,760 bytes allocated
==2636==
==2636== 72,704 bytes in 1 blocks are still reachable in loss record 1 of 1
==2636== at 0x4C2DB8F: malloc (in /usr/lib/valgrind/vgpreload_memcheck-amd64-linux.so)
==2636== by 0x4EC3EFF: ??? (in /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libstdc++.so.6.0.21)
==2636== by 0x40106B9: call_init.part.0 (dl-init.c:72)
==2636== by 0x40107CA: call_init (dl-init.c:30)
==2636== by 0x40107CA: _dl_init (dl-init.c:120)
==2636== by 0x4000C69: ??? (in /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/ld-2.23.so)
==2636==
==2636== LEAK SUMMARY:
==2636== definitely lost: 0 bytes in 0 blocks
==2636== indirectly lost: 0 bytes in 0 blocks
==2636== possibly lost: 0 bytes in 0 blocks
==2636== still reachable: 72,704 bytes in 1 blocks
==2636== suppressed: 0 bytes in 0 blocks
==2636==
==2636== For counts of detected and suppressed errors, rerun with: -v
==2636== ERROR SUMMARY: 0 errors from 0 contexts (suppressed: 0 from 0)
I can't figure out why there is still ONE out of 1003 allocs not being free.
Why do i have one memory leak? what is wrong with my destructor?
Test code here:
/* Deque Test Program 6 */
#include <cstring>
#include <iostream>
#include "Deque.h"
using namespace std ;
int main (int argc, char * const argv[]) {
cout << "\n\nDeque Class Test Program 6 - START\n\n";
// Make a Deque
Deque * dq1 = new Deque();
for( int i = 0 ; i<1 ; i++ ){
dq1->push_left(1);
// dq1->display();
}
cout << "Size=" << dq1->size() << endl ;
// The destructor should delete all the nodes.
delete dq1 ;
cout << "\n\nDeque Class Test Program 6 - DONE\n\n";
return 0;
}
edit: remove implementation code.
Essentially, it's not your code's fault, it's valgrind's.
Check this other question that has had the same problem:
Valgrind: Memory still reachable with trivial program using <iostream>
Quoting from the post:
First of all: relax, it's probably not a bug, but a feature. Many implementations of the C++ standard libraries use their own memory pool allocators. Memory for quite a number of destructed objects is not immediately freed and given back to the OS, but kept in the pool(s) for later re-use. The fact that the pools are not freed at the exit of the program cause Valgrind to report this memory as still reachable. The behaviour not to free pools at the exit could be called a bug of the library though.
Hope that helps :)
The memory leak reported by valgrind does not appear to be in your code:
==2636== 72,704 bytes in 1 blocks are still reachable in loss record 1 of 1
==2636== at 0x4C2DB8F: malloc (in /usr/lib/valgrind/vgpreload_memcheck-amd64-linux.so)
==2636== by 0x4EC3EFF: ??? (in /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libstdc++.so.6.0.21)
==2636== by 0x40106B9: call_init.part.0 (dl-init.c:72)
==2636== by 0x40107CA: call_init (dl-init.c:30)
==2636== by 0x40107CA: _dl_init (dl-init.c:120)
This appears to be a heap allocation from within a constructor of a global object. (In theory, it could still come from your code if operator new is called as a tail call, so that it does not show up in the backtrace, but I don't see such an object declaration in your cdoe.)
It is also not an actual leak, it is just some data allocated on the heap at program start. If you install debugging information for libstdc++, then you might get a hint of what is actually being allocated. Then you could also set a breakpoint on call_init and step through the early process initialization, to see the constructors that are called.

push_back a pointer of object results in segfault

The following code is to move the "non-overlapping" TablePath from vector v to vector u. I am encountering segmentaion fault at the line "u.push_back(*it1);". I didn't copy the object(but instead only copy the pointer of the object) so I believe the problem doesn't lie in copying constructor. Can you give some hints on why segfault is occuring ?
#include <iostream>
#include <vector>
using namespace std;
class TablePath
{
private:
int source;
int destination;
public:
TablePath(int,int);
~TablePath();
int overlap(TablePath*);
void toString();
TablePath(const TablePath& that) : source(that.source), destination(that.destination)
{
}
};
TablePath::TablePath(int source=0,int destination=0)
{
this->source = source;
this->destination = destination;
}
int TablePath::overlap(TablePath* thatTablePath)
{
if (this->source >= thatTablePath->source and this->source <= thatTablePath->destination)
return 1;
else if (this->destination >= thatTablePath->source and this->destination <= thatTablePath->destination)
return 1;
else if (thatTablePath->source >= this->source and thatTablePath->source <= this->destination)
return 1;
else if (thatTablePath->destination >= this->source and thatTablePath->destination <= this->destination)
return 1;
else
return 0;
}
void TablePath::toString()
{
cout << this->source << " " << this->destination << endl;
}
int main()
{
int numofTests;
cin >> numofTests;
while(numofTests > 0)
{
int numofMoves;
vector<TablePath *> v;
cin >> numofMoves;
for (int i=0;i<numofMoves;i++)
{
int source,destination;
cin >> source >> destination;
TablePath* MyTablePath = new TablePath(source,destination);
v.push_back(MyTablePath);
}
vector<TablePath *> u;
vector<TablePath *>::iterator it1 = v.begin();
u.push_back(*it1);
v.erase(v.begin());
for(vector<TablePath *>::iterator it1 = v.begin(); it1 != v.end(); ++it1)
{
for(vector<TablePath *>::iterator it2 = u.begin(); it2 != u.end(); ++it2)
{
if ((*it1)->overlap((*it2)))
{
u.push_back(*it1);
}
}
}
cout << u.size() * 10;
v.erase(v.begin(),v.end());
u.erase(u.begin(),u.end());
numofTests--;
}
}
The following is the output I get from valgrind:
frank#frank-vm:~$ valgrind --tool=memcheck ./tablepath
==6172== Memcheck, a memory error detector
==6172== Copyright (C) 2002-2011, and GNU GPL'd, by Julian Seward et al.
==6172== Using Valgrind-3.7.0 and LibVEX; rerun with -h for copyright info
==6172== Command: ./tablepath
==6172==
1
3
10
20
15 30
20 50
==6172== Invalid read of size 4
==6172== at 0x8048BB0: main (in /home/frank/tablepath)
==6172== Address 0x4320184 is 0 bytes after a block of size 4 free'd
==6172== at 0x402ACFC: operator delete(void*) (in /usr/lib/valgrind/vgpreload_memcheck-x86-linux.so)
==6172== by 0x8049616: __gnu_cxx::new_allocator<TablePath*>::deallocate(TablePath**, unsigned int) (in /home/frank/tablepath)
==6172== by 0x80493E8: std::_Vector_base<TablePath*, std::allocator<TablePath*> >::_M_deallocate(TablePath**, unsigned int) (in /home/frank/tablepath)
==6172== by 0x8049230: std::vector<TablePath*, std::allocator<TablePath*> >::_M_insert_aux(__gnu_cxx::__normal_iterator<TablePath**, std::vector<TablePath*, std::allocator<TablePath*> > >, TablePath* const&) (in /home/frank/tablepath)
==6172== by 0x8048E00: std::vector<TablePath*, std::allocator<TablePath*> >::push_back(TablePath* const&) (in /home/frank/tablepath)
==6172== by 0x8048BED: main (in /home/frank/tablepath)
==6172==
==6172== Invalid read of size 4
==6172== at 0x8048965: TablePath::overlap(TablePath*) (in /home/frank/tablepath)
==6172== by 0x8048BCA: main (in /home/frank/tablepath)
==6172== Address 0x0 is not stack'd, malloc'd or (recently) free'd
==6172==
==6172==
==6172== Process terminating with default action of signal 11 (SIGSEGV)
==6172== Access not within mapped region at address 0x0
==6172== at 0x8048965: TablePath::overlap(TablePath*) (in /home/frank/tablepath)
==6172== by 0x8048BCA: main (in /home/frank/tablepath)
==6172== If you believe this happened as a result of a stack
==6172== overflow in your program's main thread (unlikely but
==6172== possible), you can try to increase the size of the
==6172== main thread stack using the --main-stacksize= flag.
==6172== The main thread stack size used in this run was 8388608.
==6172==
==6172== HEAP SUMMARY:
==6172== in use at exit: 48 bytes in 5 blocks
==6172== total heap usage: 8 allocs, 3 frees, 64 bytes allocated
==6172==
==6172== LEAK SUMMARY:
==6172== definitely lost: 0 bytes in 0 blocks
==6172== indirectly lost: 0 bytes in 0 blocks
==6172== possibly lost: 0 bytes in 0 blocks
==6172== still reachable: 48 bytes in 5 blocks
==6172== suppressed: 0 bytes in 0 blocks
==6172== Rerun with --leak-check=full to see details of leaked memory
==6172==
==6172== For counts of detected and suppressed errors, rerun with: -v
==6172== ERROR SUMMARY: 2 errors from 2 contexts (suppressed: 0 from 0)
Segmentation fault (core dumped)
std::vector<T>::push_back is (usually) allowed to invalidate all iterators associated with the vector object. So after you do:
u.push_back(*it1);
it is not safe to continue the inner for loop with ++it2.
You could use an index for the inner loop instead. Or, break out of the inner loop right after doing the push_back, if you don't really want multiple copies of the same TablePath* pointer in u.

Why am I getting a segmentation fault? Valgrind?

I have written a program to determine the longest common subsequence between two strings. I have tested my function LCSLength() with a small hard coded test case and it returns the correct value.
Now, I am reading strings from a file to compare, and my program gives me a segmentation fault. Here is the code:
#include <iostream>
#include <string>
#include <vector>
#include <fstream>
using namespace std;
int LCSLength(string X,string Y);
int main()
{
ifstream inData("sequences.dat");
vector<string> lines(1);
string line;
int LCS;
while (getline(inData,line))
{
if (line.empty())
lines.push_back("");
else
lines.back() += line;
}
LCS = LCSLength(lines[0],lines[1]);
cout << "The LCS is: " << LCS << endl;
return 0;
}
int LCSLength(string X,string Y)
{
int m = X.size();
int n = Y.size();
int L[m+1][n+1];
for(int i=0; i<=m; i++)
{
for(int j=0; j<=n; j++)
{
if(i==0 || j==0)
L[i][j] = 0;
else if(X[i-1]==Y[j-1])
L[i][j] = L[i-1][j-1]+1;
else
L[i][j] = max(L[i-1][j],L[i][j-1]);
}
}
return L[m][n];
}
When I compile using -pedantic -ansi, I get the following error: In function LCSLength(std::string, std::string): ISO C++ forbids variable size array 'L'.
I compiled using Valgrind, and here are the errors it produced:
==15183== LEAK SUMMARY:
==15183== definitely lost: 8,624 bytes in 14 blocks
==15183== indirectly lost: 1,168 bytes in 5 blocks
==15183== possibly lost: 5,518 bytes in 58 blocks
==15183== still reachable: 44,925 bytes in 278 blocks
==15183== suppressed: 0 bytes in 0 blocks
==15183== Reachable blocks (those to which a pointer was found) are not shown.
==15183== To see them, rerun with: --leak-check=full --show-reachable=yes
==15183==
==15183== ERROR SUMMARY: 23 errors from 23 contexts (suppressed: 0 from 0)
==15183==
==15183== 1 errors in context 1 of 23:
==15183== Invalid read of size 4
==15183== at 0x38326: std::string::_Rep::_M_grab(std::allocator<char> const&, std::allocator<char> const&) (in /usr/lib/libstdc++.6.0.9.dylib)
==15183== by 0x388EF: std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> >::basic_string(std::string const&) (in /usr/lib/libstdc++.6.0.9.dylib)
==15183== by 0x100001AAE: main (firstt.cpp:23)
==15183== Address 0xfffffffffffffff8 is not stack'd, malloc'd or (recently) free'd
==15183==
==15183==
==15183== 1 errors in context 2 of 23:
==15183== Invalid read of size 8
==15183== at 0x388DC: std::basic_string<char, std::char_traits<char>, std::allocator<char> >::basic_string(std::string const&) (in /usr/lib/libstdc++.6.0.9.dylib)
==15183== by 0x100001AAE: main (firstt.cpp:23)
==15183== Address 0x100023d28 is 0 bytes after a block of size 8 alloc'd
==15183== at 0x5237: malloc (in /usr/local/Cellar/valgrind/3.8.1/lib/valgrind/vgpreload_memcheck-amd64-darwin.so)
==15183== by 0x4B346: operator new(unsigned long) (in /usr/lib/libstdc++.6.0.9.dylib)
==15183== by 0x100002DFE: __gnu_cxx::new_allocator<std::string>::allocate(unsigned long, void const*) (new_allocator.h:91)
==15183== by 0x100002E42: std::_Vector_base<std::string, std::allocator<std::string> >::_M_allocate(unsigned long) (stl_vector.h:131)
==15183== by 0x100002E9D: std::_Vector_base<std::string, std::allocator<std::string> >::_Vector_base(unsigned long, std::allocator<std::string> const&) (stl_vector.h:116)
==15183== by 0x1000030E4: std::vector<std::string, std::allocator<std::string> >::vector(unsigned long, std::string const&, std::allocator<std::string> const&) (stl_vector.h:215)
==15183== by 0x1000017D9: main (firstt.cpp:11)
==15183==
==15183== ERROR SUMMARY: 23 errors from 23 contexts (suppressed: 0 from 0)
Segmentation fault: 11
My test file has two lines of sequences. I check lines.size() and it returns 2. I also cout << lines[0] and cout << lines[1] and the correct strings are printed.
Can anyone help me figure this out? Thanks.
your lines vector always contains one element, therefore accesing it by index 1 causes UB
LCS = LCSLength(lines[0],lines[1]);
here ^
Did you confirm that after exiting the while loop, both lines[0] and lines[1] exist? This will happen only if you have at least one empty line in your input file (and recognized as such).
According to Valgrind (do read its output!) - you are doing something wrong from within main (lines 11 or 23) and not from LCSLength.