Skip to content

Fix issues #103 and #104 #106

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

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Mar 22, 2025
Merged

Fix issues #103 and #104 #106

merged 1 commit into from
Mar 22, 2025

Conversation

HurryPeng
Copy link
Contributor

This pull request fixes issues #103 and #104.

I encountered this issue while running my code with Valgrind today. Below is part of the Valgrind error message:

==1578139== 472 bytes in 1 blocks are still reachable in loss record 1 of 1
==1578139==    at 0x4848899: malloc (...)
==1578139==    by 0x4B3AF62: fdopen@@GLIBC_2.2.5 (...)
==1578139==    by 0x118B09: subprocess::Popen::execute_process() (...)

I noticed that a similar fix had been proposed by another contributor previously. I did not mean to scoop their work, but merely hoping to fix it sooner so other people don't get confused by it just as I did today.

Thank you!

@arun11299 arun11299 merged commit 3afe581 into arun11299:master Mar 22, 2025
3 checks passed
hebasto added a commit to hebasto/bitcoin that referenced this pull request Apr 22, 2025
hebasto pushed a commit to hebasto/bitcoin that referenced this pull request May 1, 2025
I encountered this issue while running my code with Valgrind today.
Below is part of the Valgrind error message:

```
==1578139== 472 bytes in 1 blocks are still reachable in loss record 1 of 1
==1578139==    at 0x4848899: malloc (...)
==1578139==    by 0x4B3AF62: fdopen@@GLIBC_2.2.5 (...)
==1578139==    by 0x118B09: subprocess::Popen::execute_process() (...)
```

I noticed that a similar fix had been proposed by another contributor
previously. I did not mean to scoop their work, but merely hoping to fix
it sooner so other people don't get confused by it just as I did today.

Github-Pull: arun11299/cpp-subprocess#106
Rebased-From: 3afe581c1f22f106d59cf54b9b65251e6c554671
hebasto added a commit to bitcoin/bitcoin that referenced this pull request May 5, 2025
cd95c9d subprocess: check and handle fcntl(F_GETFD) failure (Tomás Andróil)
b7288de subprocess: Proper implementation of wait() on Windows (Haowen Liu)
7423214 subprocess: Do not escape double quotes for command line arguments on Windows (Hennadii Stepanov)
bb9ffea subprocess: Explicitly define move constructor of Streams class (Shunsuke Shimizu)
174bd43 subprocess: Avoid leaking POSIX name aliases beyond `subprocess.h` (Hennadii Stepanov)
7997b76 subprocess: Fix cross-compiling with mingw toolchain (Hennadii Stepanov)
6476304 subprocess: Get Windows return code in wait() (Haowen Liu)
d3f511b subprocess: Fix string_arg when used with rref (Haowen Liu)
2fd3f2f subprocess: Fix memory leaks (Haoran Peng)

Pull request description:

  Most of these changes were developed during work on #29868 and #32342 and have since been upstreamed.

  As they are now merged, this PR backports them to our `src/util/subprocess.h` header.

  Required for #29868.

  A list of the backported PRs:
   - arun11299/cpp-subprocess#106
  - arun11299/cpp-subprocess#110
  - arun11299/cpp-subprocess#109
  - arun11299/cpp-subprocess#99
  - arun11299/cpp-subprocess#112
  - arun11299/cpp-subprocess#107
  - arun11299/cpp-subprocess#113
  - arun11299/cpp-subprocess#116
  - arun11299/cpp-subprocess#117

  The following PRs were skipped for backporting:
  - arun11299/cpp-subprocess#108 because we are not planning to support this feature.
  - arun11299/cpp-subprocess#101 because that change has been already landed in #29849.

ACKs for top commit:
  theStack:
    Light ACK cd95c9d
  laanwj:
    Code review re-ACK cd95c9d

Tree-SHA512: f9b60b932957d2e1cad1d87f2ad8bb68c97136e9735eb78547018a42cc50c4652750367f29462eadb0512c27db1dd8a7d4b17a2f0aeab62b3dbf86db5f51a61c
w0xlt pushed a commit to w0xlt/bitcoin that referenced this pull request May 7, 2025
I encountered this issue while running my code with Valgrind today.
Below is part of the Valgrind error message:

```
==1578139== 472 bytes in 1 blocks are still reachable in loss record 1 of 1
==1578139==    at 0x4848899: malloc (...)
==1578139==    by 0x4B3AF62: fdopen@@GLIBC_2.2.5 (...)
==1578139==    by 0x118B09: subprocess::Popen::execute_process() (...)
```

I noticed that a similar fix had been proposed by another contributor
previously. I did not mean to scoop their work, but merely hoping to fix
it sooner so other people don't get confused by it just as I did today.

Github-Pull: arun11299/cpp-subprocess#106
Rebased-From: 3afe581c1f22f106d59cf54b9b65251e6c554671
alexanderwiederin pushed a commit to alexanderwiederin/bitcoin that referenced this pull request May 8, 2025
I encountered this issue while running my code with Valgrind today.
Below is part of the Valgrind error message:

```
==1578139== 472 bytes in 1 blocks are still reachable in loss record 1 of 1
==1578139==    at 0x4848899: malloc (...)
==1578139==    by 0x4B3AF62: fdopen@@GLIBC_2.2.5 (...)
==1578139==    by 0x118B09: subprocess::Popen::execute_process() (...)
```

I noticed that a similar fix had been proposed by another contributor
previously. I did not mean to scoop their work, but merely hoping to fix
it sooner so other people don't get confused by it just as I did today.

Github-Pull: arun11299/cpp-subprocess#106
Rebased-From: 3afe581c1f22f106d59cf54b9b65251e6c554671
Eunovo pushed a commit to Eunovo/bitcoin that referenced this pull request May 12, 2025
I encountered this issue while running my code with Valgrind today.
Below is part of the Valgrind error message:

```
==1578139== 472 bytes in 1 blocks are still reachable in loss record 1 of 1
==1578139==    at 0x4848899: malloc (...)
==1578139==    by 0x4B3AF62: fdopen@@GLIBC_2.2.5 (...)
==1578139==    by 0x118B09: subprocess::Popen::execute_process() (...)
```

I noticed that a similar fix had been proposed by another contributor
previously. I did not mean to scoop their work, but merely hoping to fix
it sooner so other people don't get confused by it just as I did today.

Github-Pull: arun11299/cpp-subprocess#106
Rebased-From: 3afe581c1f22f106d59cf54b9b65251e6c554671
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.

2 participants