Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Fix memory leak in getaddrinfo and make it async exception safe #591

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

arybczak
Copy link
Contributor

#587 removed the call to c_freeaddrinfo in getaddrinfo.

This restores it and in addition makes the function async exception safe.

haskell#587 removed the call to `c_freeaddrinfo`
in `getaddrinfo`.

This restores it and in addition makes the function async exception safe.
Copy link
Collaborator

@kazu-yamamoto kazu-yamamoto left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thank you for bringing this issue.
This is a nice catch.

This is a common pattern.
So, I would like you to check if bracketOnError can be used instead of mask.

@arybczak
Copy link
Contributor Author

bracket can be used, but then the code will have to check ret /= 0 twice unlike the current version. If you're fine with that, I can edit it.

@kazu-yamamoto
Copy link
Collaborator

I meant bracketOnError, not bracket.

@kazu-yamamoto
Copy link
Collaborator

See the following definition. It uses the same pattern as you wrote.

bracketOnError
        :: IO a         -- ^ computation to run first (\"acquire resource\")
        -> (a -> IO b)  -- ^ computation to run last (\"release resource\")
        -> (a -> IO c)  -- ^ computation to run in-between
        -> IO c         -- returns the value from the in-between computation
bracketOnError before after thing =
  mask $ \restore -> do
    a <- before
    restore (thing a) `onException` after a

@kubek2k
Copy link

kubek2k commented Nov 26, 2024

@kazu-yamamoto seems to me that the result of before would have to be visible outside of bracketOnError call (ret /= 0) which defeats the purpose here :(

@arybczak
Copy link
Contributor Author

arybczak commented Nov 26, 2024

It uses the same pattern as you wrote.

Not really, because I used c_freeaddrinfo twice, just as in regular bracket.

In any case, I tried to use bracket but branching on ret throws a wrench into this pattern and makes the code very convoluted:

      bracket
        (do ret <- c_getaddrinfo c_node c_service c_hints ptr_ptr_addrs
            ptr_addrs <- if ret == 0
                         then peek ptr_ptr_addrs
                         else return nullPtr
            return (ret, ptr_addrs)
        )
        (\(ret, ptr_addrs) -> do
            -- Don't call freeaddrinfo with NULL, it segfaults on some
            -- platforms.
            when (ret == 0) $ c_freeaddrinfo ptr_addrs
        )
        (\(ret, ptr_addrs) ->
           if ret == 0
           then followAddrInfo ptr_addrs
           else do
             err <- gai_strerror ret
             ioError $ ioeSetErrorString
               (mkIOError NoSuchThing message Nothing Nothing)
               err
        )

that's why I unrolled it in the first place and I don't think trying to force it is worth it.

If you disagree, please fix it the way you like.

Also, please make a new release with this fix asap and deprecate 3.2.3.0, 3.2.4.0, 3.2.5.0 and 3.2.6.0 on Hackage because this is a very serious bug.

@Vlix
Copy link

Vlix commented Nov 26, 2024

How about something like this?

getAddrs = do
    ret <- c_getaddrinfo c_node c_service c_hints
    if ret == 0
        then Right <$> peek ptr_ptr_addrs
        else pure $ Left ret

addrErr ret = do
    err <- gai_strerror ret
    ioError $ ioeSetErrorString
        (mkIOError NoSuchThing message Nothing Nothing)
        err

bracket
    getAddrs 
    (mapM_ c_freeaddrinfo)
    (either addrErr followAddrInfo)

@kazu-yamamoto
Copy link
Collaborator

Not really, because I used c_freeaddrinfo twice, just as in regular bracket.

You are right.

After this discussion, the original PR code is simplest, I think.
So, let's merge this.

Copy link
Collaborator

@kazu-yamamoto kazu-yamamoto left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Now LGTM.

kazu-yamamoto added a commit to kazu-yamamoto/network that referenced this pull request Nov 27, 2024
@kazu-yamamoto
Copy link
Collaborator

v3.2.7.0 has been released.
v3.2.3.0, 3.2.4.0, 3.2.5.0 and 3.2.6.0 are deprecated.
Thank you for your contribution!

@Vlix
Copy link

Vlix commented Nov 27, 2024

@kazu-yamamoto
It seems 3.2.7.0 is also deprecated on hackage?
(and 3.2.3.0 is not)

@kazu-yamamoto
Copy link
Collaborator

My bad. X-(
Fixed!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants