using boost::pool_all ocator<T> ?

[Chris Jones]

Hi,

I've experimenting with using boost::pool_all ocator with std::vector and gcc
(4.1)., and I am having problems with segmentation violations. Below I give
a simple example of one way I am getting this

// Include files
#include <cmath>
#include <iostream>
#include <vector>
#include <map>
#include "boost/pool/pool_alloc.hpp"

//--- Example main program
int main ( int argc, char** argv )
{
typedef std::vector< int, boost::pool_all ocator<int Vector;
typedef std::map< int, Vector Map;

Vector v;
v.push_back(10) ;

Map map;
map[2].push_back(10);

return 0;
}

gives

Program received signal SIGSEGV, Segmentation fault.
0x080497bc in boost::simple_s egregated_stora ge<unsigned int>::segregate
(block=0x9d1109 8, sz=0, partition_sz=4,
end=0x9d111d0)
at /usr/include/boost/pool/simple_segregat ed_storage.hpp: 207
207 nextof(iter) = old;
(gdb) where
#0 0x080497bc in boost::simple_s egregated_stora ge<unsigned int>::segregate
(block=0x9d1109 8, sz=0,
partition_sz=4, end=0x9d111d0)
at /usr/include/boost/pool/simple_segregat ed_storage.hpp: 207
#1 0x08049818 in boost::simple_s egregated_stora ge<unsigned int>::add_block
(this=0x804d818 , block=0x9d11098 ,
nsz=0, npartition_sz=4 )
at /usr/include/boost/pool/simple_segregat ed_storage.hpp: 72
#2 0x08049a36 in boost::simple_s egregated_stora ge<unsigned
int>::add_order ed_block (this=0x804d818 ,
block=0x9d11098 , nsz=0, npartition_sz=4 )
at /usr/include/boost/pool/simple_segregat ed_storage.hpp: 89
#3 0x08049aa4 in boost::simple_s egregated_stora ge<unsigned
int>::ordered_f ree_n (this=0x804d818 ,
chunks=0x9d1109 8, n=0, partition_size= 4)
at /usr/include/boost/pool/simple_segregat ed_storage.hpp: 159
#4 0x08049b19 in
boost::pool<boo st::default_use r_allocator_new _delete>::order ed_free
(this=0x804d818 ,
chunks=0x9d1109 8, n=0) at /usr/include/boost/pool/pool.hpp:268
#5 0x0804a30d in boost::singleto n_pool<boost::p ool_allocator_t ag, 4u,
boost::default_ user_allocator_ new_delete,
boost::details: :pool::pthread_ mutex, 32u>::ordered_f ree (ptr=0x9d11098,
n=0)
at /usr/include/boost/pool/singleton_pool. hpp:101
#6 0x0804a358 in boost::pool_all ocator<int,
boost::default_ user_allocator_ new_delete,
boost::details: :pool::pthread_ mutex, 32u>::deallocat e (ptr=0x9d11098, n=0)
at /usr/include/boost/pool/pool_alloc.hpp: 107
#7 0x0804a378 in std::_Vector_ba se<int, boost::pool_all ocator<int,
boost::default_ user_allocator_ new_delete,
boost::details: :pool::pthread_ mutex, 32u::_M_dealloc ate
(this=0xbffed85 8, __p=0x9d11098, __n=0)

at /usr/lib/gcc/i386-redhat-linux/4.1.1/../../../../include/c++/4.1.1/bits/stl_vector.h:13 3
#8 0x0804a3b0 in ~_Vector_base (this=0xbffed85 8)

at /usr/lib/gcc/i386-redhat-linux/4.1.1/../../../../include/c++/4.1.1/bits/stl_vector.h:11 9
#9 0x0804a3f4 in ~vector (this=0xbffed85 8)

at /usr/lib/gcc/i386-redhat-linux/4.1.1/../../../../include/c++/4.1.1/bits/stl_vector.h:27 2
#10 0x0804a436 in ~pair (this=0xbffed85 4)

at /usr/lib/gcc/i386-redhat-linux/4.1.1/../../../../include/c++/4.1.1/bits/stl_pair.h:69
#11 0x0804b040 in std::map<int, std::vector<int , boost::pool_all ocator<int,
boost::default_ user_allocator_ new_delete,
boost::details: :pool::pthread_ mutex, 32u, std::less<int>,
std::allocator< std::pair<int const, std::vector<int ,
boost::pool_all ocator<int, boost::default_ user_allocator_ new_delete,
boost::details: :pool::pthread_ mutex, 32u >::operator[]
(this=0xbffed8a c, __k=@0xbffed8dc )

at /usr/lib/gcc/i386-redhat-linux/4.1.1/../../../../include/c++/4.1.1/bits/stl_map.h:348
#12 0x08048cfd in main () at main.cpp:21
what I am doing wrong

[Boris]

On Sun, 25 Mar 2007 15:33:23 +0200, Chris Jones <jo****@hep.phy .cam.ac.uk
wrote:

Hi,

I've experimenting with using boost::pool_all ocator with std::vector and
gcc
(4.1)., and I am having problems with segmentation violations. Below I
give
a simple example of one way I am getting this

It's a bug in boost::pool_all ocator (you get also a crash with VC++ 8.0)..
See
http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index...86&atid=107586
for some details.

Boris

[...]

[Chris Jones]

It's a bug in boost::pool_all ocator (you get also a crash with VC++ 8.0).
See

http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index...86&atid=107586

for some details.

Boris

>[...]

Hi,

Thanks for your reply. I guess I will just have to work around thins
problem. Judging by the post dates, the bug has been around for some time.
Any idea if a fix is coming or not ?

FYI I've discover that the other reason I was getting segmentation
violations was due to requests for vectors of size 0. i.e.

std::vector<int v1(0); // works fine
std::vector<int ,boost::pool_al locator<int v2(0); // causes a segmentation
violation when v2 goes out of scope.

same problem ?

cheers Chris

[Boris]

On Tue, 27 Mar 2007 23:53:21 +0200, Chris Jones <jo****@hep.phy .cam.ac.uk>
wrote:

[...]Thanks for your reply. I guess I will just have to work around thins
problem. Judging by the post dates, the bug has been around for some

Yes, you have to remove pool_allocator from the inner vector.

time.
Any idea if a fix is coming or not ?

I don't know. I think there hasn't been anyone working on this problem so
far.

FYI I've discover that the other reason I was getting segmentation
violations was due to requests for vectors of size 0. i.e.

std::vector<int v1(0); // works fine
std::vector<int ,boost::pool_al locator<int v2(0); // causes a
segmentation
violation when v2 goes out of scope.

same problem ?

Hm, don't know really. If you want to be sure you better submit another
bug report. :)

Boris