Skip to content

Conversation

@corona10
Copy link
Member

@corona10corona10 commented Jun 16, 2020

@corona10
Copy link
MemberAuthor

corona10 commented Jun 16, 2020

I' ve checked the memory leak with these scripts and no leaks found

./python.exe -m test test_dbm_gnu -R 3:3 
deftest_gdbm(self): code=textwrap.dedent(r""" import glob import test.support dbm = test.support.import_module('_gdbm') # or dbm = test.support.import_module('dbm') _fname = test.support.TESTFN def delete_files(): for f in glob.glob(_fname + "*"): test.support.unlink(f) f = dbm.open(_fname, 'n') f[b'g'] = b"indented" f.close() delete_files() """) ret=test.support.run_in_subinterp(code) self.assertEqual(ret, 0)

@corona10
Copy link
MemberAuthor

Note that dbm = test.support.import_module('dbm') is leaked at the master branch :)

Copy link
Member

@vstinnervstinner left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM.

Minor remarks:

  • I'm not sure why only a few methods uses the defining class, whereas some others use Py_TYPE(self).
  • nitpick: some "clinic input" uses an empty line betwen the function name and its parameters, sometimes there is none.

But I don't think that it's worth it to address these minor things. If you care, you may also update _dbmmodule.c. Maybe in a follow-up PRs.

@vstinner
Copy link
Member

Note that dbm = test.support.import_module('dbm') is leaked at the master branch :)

Maybe open an issue to track this bug.

@vstinner
Copy link
Member

Maybe open an issue to track this bug.

Well, I added a comment to: https://bugs.python.org/issue40987#msg371679

@corona10
Copy link
MemberAuthor

@vstinner

Maybe open an issue to track this bug

Oh I mean the subinterpreter test with dbm = test.support.import_module('dbm')is leaked
With this change, there is no leak.

@corona10corona10 merged commit c4862e3 into python:masterJun 16, 2020
@corona10
Copy link
MemberAuthor

@vstinner Thanks for the review!

@vstinner
Copy link
Member

With this change, there is no leak.

Oh ok, that's great! Sorry, I misunderstood your comment.

@corona10corona10 deleted the bpo-1635741-gdbm branch February 15, 2024 01:41
Sign up for freeto 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

@corona10@vstinner@the-knights-who-say-ni@bedevere-bot