I remembered that when you call realloc() and the return address is different from the original one, then realloc() should copy the content of the original block to the newly allocated block. But in my recent program I found it didnt do it correctly. So how could this happen?
My platform is Mingw32.
for example,
before realloc()
after realloc()Code:msg_in_all, len: 111, addr: 009C1960 01000029 0301446D 6B1D278D 11AE381E 01000029 0301446D 6B1D278D 11AE381E FB49D271 EA2D0F36 F97B8E85 EFA0AA64 B5117225 DB740000 02001301 00000000 01000029 0301446D 6B1D278D 11AE381E FB49D271 EA2D0F36 F97B8E85 EFA0AA64 B5117225 DB74000B 00000010 000000
Code:msg_in_all, len: 115, addr: 009C19E0 7E740000 13000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 FFFFFFFF 00000000 00000000 00000000 01000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 D7A10B10 00000000 10F7C277 00000000 0000000F 000000
Please show a minimal test case that we can see your code and run it.
Sorry, my program is large. So I cannot give you such code to run for test. But I did write a small test program to test realloc(), and nothing abnormal happened.
Which basically means you've pre-corrupted the memory pool in some way, and here is where you get to notice your prior mistake.
Finding the root original cause of the problem is of course another matter.
If you're using linux, I would suggest electic fence.
gcc -g prog.c -lefence
Followed by running the code in the debugger.
You should end up with a stack trace to the point of first corruption of the memory pool.
If you dance barefoot on the broken glass of undefined behaviour, you've got to expect the occasional cut.
If at first you don't succeed, try writing your phone number on the exam paper.
Well, how can memory pool be corrupted?
free, malloc, realloc or something like this?
I'm really sorry for this thread, because it's not the realloc()'s fault but mine. I actually use the shorter size for realloc() but not the longer which I respect, so the problem has been solved. Any way, thanks for your warmly help.
Corruption of the "memory pool" is more usually caused by pointer molestation (i.e. doing an invalid operation involving a pointer) or falling of the end of an array. Examples include dereferencing a NULL, accessing memory after free()ing it, accessing array[5] when the array only has 5 elements, dereferencing a dangling reference, etc.Originally Posted by TalosChen
None of these errors specifically corrupt the "memory pool": the issue with pointer errors is that your program usually modifies some area of memory that it shouldn't and, in some cases, the affected memory happens to be used by the free/malloc/realloc/calloc functions. Pointer molestation could just as easily tromp some other area of memory and cause some other strange symptom.
