I'm getting this unhandled exception when I exit my program:
Unhandled exception at 0x102fe274 (msvcr100d.dll) in Parameters.exe: 0xC0000005: Access violation reading location 0x00000005.
The debugger stops in a module called crtdll.c on this line:
onexitbegin_new = (_PVFV *) DecodePointer(__onexitbegin);
The top line on the call stack reads:
msvcr100d.dll!__clean_type_info_names_internal(__type_info_node * p_type_info_root_node=0x04a6506c) Line 359 + 0x3 bytes C++
The program then remains in memory until I close down the IDE.
I'm more used to developing with managed languages so I expect I'm doing something wrong with my code maintenance. The code itself reads a memory mapped file and assoiciates it with pointers:
SUBROUTINE READ_MMF ()
USE IFWIN
USE, INTRINSIC :: iso_c_binding
USE, INTRINSIC :: iso_fortran_env
INTEGER(HANDLE) file_mapping_handle
INTEGER(LPVOID) memory_location
TYPE(C_PTR) memory_location_cptr
INTEGER memory_size
INTEGER (HANDLE) file_map
CHARACTER(5) :: map_name
TYPE(C_PTR) :: cdata
integer :: n = 3
integer(4), POINTER :: A, C
real(8), POINTER :: B
TYPE STRUCT
integer(4) :: A
real(8) :: B
integer(4) :: C
END TYPE STRUCT
TYPE(STRUCT), pointer :: STRUCT_PTR
memory_size = 100000
map_name = 'myMMF'
file_map = CreateFileMapping(INVALID_HANDLE_VALUE,
+ NULL,
+ PAGE_READWRITE,
+ 0,
+ memory_size,
+ map_name // C_NULL_CHAR )
memory_location = MapViewOfFile(file_map,
+IOR(FILE_MAP_WRITE, FILE_MAP_READ),
+ 0, 0, 0 )
cdata = TRANSFER(memory_location, memory_location_cptr)
call c_f_pointer(cdata, STRUCT_PTR, [n])
A => STRUCT_PTR%A
B => STRUCT_PTR%B
C => STRUCT_PTR%C
RETURN
END
Am I supposed to deallocate the c-pointers when I'm finished with them? I looked into that but can't see how I do it in Fortran...
Thanks for any help!
The nature of the access violation (during runtime library cleanup) suggests that your program is corrupting memory in some way. There are a number of programming errors that can lead to that - and the error or errors responsible could be anywhere in your program. The usual "compile and run with all diagnostic and debugging options enabled" approach may help identify these.
That said, there is a programming error in the code example shown. The C_F_POINTER procedure from the ISO_C_BINDING intrinsic module can operate on either scalar or array Fortran pointers (the second argument). If the Fortran pointer is a scalar then the third "shape" argument must not be present (it must be present if the Fortran pointer is an array).
Your code breaks this requirement - the Fortran pointer STRUCT_PTR in your code is a scalar, but yet you provide the third shape argument (as [n]). It is quite plausible that this error will result in memory corruption - typically the implementation of C_F_POINTER would try and populate a descriptor in memory for the Fortran pointer, and the descriptor for a pointer to an array may be very different from a pointer to a scalar.
Subsequent references to STRUCT_PTR may further the corruption.
While it is not required by the standard to diagnose this situation, I am a little surprised that the compiler does not issue a diagnostic (assuming you example code is what you actually are compiling). If you reported this to your compiler's vendor (Intel, presumably given IFWIN etc) I suspect they would regard it as a deficiency in their compiler.
To release the memory associated with the file mapping you use the UnmapViewOfFile and CloseHandle API's. To use these you should "store" (your program needs to remember in some way) the base address (memory_location, which can also be obtained by calling C_LOC on STRUCT_PTR once the problem above is fixed) returned by MapViewOfFile, and the handle to the mapping (file_map) returned by CreateFileMapping; respectively.
I've only ever done this with Cray Pointers: not with the ISO bindings and I know it does work with Cray Pointers.
What you don't say is whether this is happening the first time or second time the routine is being called. If it is called more than once, then there is a problem in the coding in that Create/OpenFileMapping should only be called once to get a handle.
You don't need to deallocate memory because the memory is not yours to deallocate: you need to call UnmapViewOfFile(memory_location). After you have called this, memory_location, memory_location_cptr and possibly cdata are no longer valid.
The way this works is with two or more programs:
One program calls CreateFileMapping, the others calls OpenFileMapping to obtain a handle to the data. This only needs to be called once at the start of the program: not every time you need to access the file. Multiple calls to Create/OpenFileMapping without a corresponding close can cause crashes.
They then call MapViewOfFile to map the file into memory. Note that only one program can do this at a time. When the program is finished with the memory file, it calls UnmapViewOfFile. The other program can now get to the file. There is a blocking mechanism. If you do not call UnmapViewOfFile, other programs using MapViewOfFile will be blocked.
When all is done, call close on the handle created by Create/OpenFileMapping.
Related
I have a problem assigning a pointer to a structure, to a pointer to a structure.
I use gfortran 4.6.3, and the name of the file is test_pointer_struct.f08 so I am using the Fortran 2008 standard (as supported by gfortran 4.6.3).
Hera comes the code:
PROGRAM test_pointer_struct
type tSmall
integer :: a
double precision :: b
end type tSmall
type tBig
integer :: h
type(tSmall), pointer :: member_small
end type tBig
type(tBig) :: var_big
type(tSmall), pointer :: var_small(:)
! We get an array of pointers to the small structure
allocate(var_small(3))
! Also allocate the member_small strucutre (not an array)
allocate(var_big%member_small)
var_big%member_small%a = 1
var_big%member_small%b = 2.0
! Now we want an element of the var_samall array of pointers, to point to the member_small in member_big
var_small(1) => var_big%member_small ! <- I get a compilation error here
! And dissasociate the member_small (we still maintain access to memory space through var_small(1)
var_big%member_small => NULL()
END PROGRAM test_pointer_struct
When I complie this, I get the following error:
Error: Se esperaba una especificación de límites para 'var_small' en (1)
Which could be translated as
Error: Limit specification expected for 'var_small' at (1)
What does this error mean?. What am I doing wrong?
Thank you very much in advance.
Fortran doesn't really do arrays of pointers. Your declaration
type(tSmall), pointer :: var_small(:)
doesn't define var_small to be an array of pointers to things of type tsmall; rather it defines it to be a pointer to an array of things of type tsmall.
When I compile your code Intel Fortran gives the rather more helpful error message
The syntax of this data pointer assignment is incorrect: either 'bound
spec' or 'bound remapping' is expected in this context.
which takes us to R735 in the Fortran 2003 standard. The compiler tries to parse var_small(1) not, as you wish, as a reference to the first element in an array of pointers but to either a bounds-spec-list or a bounds-remapping-list. The expression does not have the right syntax for either and the parse fails.
So that deals with the question of what the error means. What do you do about it ? That depends on your intentions. The usual suggestion is to define a derived type, along these lines
type myptr
type(tsmall), pointer :: psmall
end type myptr
and then use an array of those
type(myptr), dimension(:), allocatable :: ptrarray
Personally I've never liked that approach and have never needed to use it (I write very simple programs). I expect that with Fortran 2003 there are better approaches too but without knowing your intentions I hesitate to offer advice.
This is my first attempt at library assembly, so please have mercy!
I am trying to link an external library (written in .f90 and compiled with IVF on VS2012) to my Qt application (32bit based on Qt 5.5.0- MinGW 4.9.2).
I have a few questions:
1) Is this futile? Some of the research I have found suggests that IVF and MinGW are ABI incompatible. I really want to stay with the MinGW compiler in Qt because basically everything else we are doing with the software uses this.
2) It would be of advantage to be able to load the library only when called upon (which would only represent a fraction of cases). For this reason I have been attempting to use QLibrary but keep getting Segmentation faults when I try to call SUBROUTINES defined in my DLL (with resolve("my_function")):
I have defined my external subroutine as (just a simple test at this stage, not actually important for what I wanted to do!)
Although the actual code I need to access is much more complicated (baby steps!), I wrote a simple subroutine to return the square of an integer:
SUBROUTINE SQ(a,asquare)
!DEC$ ATTRIBUTES C, REFERENCE, MIXED_STR_LEN_ARG, DLLEXPORT, ALIAS:"SQ" :: SQ
integer, intent(in) :: a ! input
integer, intent(out) :: asquare ! output
asquare = a**2
END SUBROUTINE SQ
I import the library and call it within Qt with:
typedef int (*MyPrototype)(int i);
MyPrototype Square = (MyPrototype) FAST.resolve("SQ");
int K = 4;
int J = Square(K);
This results in a segregation error
3) Is there any way to check if the library has, in fact, loaded? Of course calling a subroutine would accomplish this, but that isn't working, and when I import the library DLLname.load() returns a positive result. and resolve.("sub_name") has a memoryaddress allocated to it. Does this suggest a type fault? Ie. passing the wrong identifier in to the fortran code.
Once again, thanks for reading and please feel free to take apart any flaws in logic I have, I'm not a programmer!
My goal is to call Windows' GetModuleInformation function to get a MODULEINFO struct back. This is all working fine. The problem comes as a result of me wanting to do pointer arithmetic and dereferences on the LPVOID lpBaseOfDll which is part of the MODULEINFO.
Here is my code to call the function in Lua:
require "luarocks.require"
require "alien"
sizeofMODULEINFO = 12 --Gotten from sizeof(MODULEINFO) from Visual Studio
MODULEINFO = alien.defstruct{
{"lpBaseOfDll", "pointer"}; --Does this need to be a buffer? If so, how?
{"SizeOfImage", "ulong"};
{"EntryPoint", "pointer"};
}
local GetModuleInformation = alien.Kernel32.K32GetModuleInformation
GetModuleInformation:types{ret = "int", abi = "stdcall", "long", "pointer", "pointer", "ulong"}
local GetModuleHandle = alien.Kernel32.GetModuleHandleA
GetModuleHandle:types{ret = "pointer", abi = "stdcall", "pointer"}
local GetCurrentProcess = alien.Kernel32.GetCurrentProcess
GetCurrentProcess:types{ret = "long", abi = "stdcall"}
local mod = MODULEINFO:new() --Create struct (needs buffer?)
local currentProcess = GetCurrentProcess()
local moduleHandle = GetModuleHandle("myModule.dll")
local success = GetModuleInformation(currentProcess, moduleHandle, mod(), sizeofMODULEINFO)
if success == 0 then --If there is an error, exit
return 0
end
local dataPtr = mod.lpBaseOfDll
--Now how do I do pointer arithmetic and/or dereference "dataPtr"?
At this point, mod.SizeOfImage seems to be giving me the correct values that I am expecting, so I know the functions are being called and the struct is being populated. However, I cannot seem to do pointer arithmetic on mod.lpBaseOfDll because it is a UserData.
The only information in the Alien Documentation that may address what I'm trying to do are these:
Pointer Unpacking
Alien also provides three convenience functions that let you
dereference a pointer and convert the value to a Lua type:
alien.tostring takes a userdata (usually returned from a function that has a pointer return value), casts it to char*, and returns a Lua
string. You can supply an optional size argument (if you don’t Alien
calls strlen on the buffer first).
alien.toint takes a userdata, casts it to int*, dereferences it and returns it as a number. If you pass it a number it assumes the
userdata is an array with this number of elements.
alien.toshort, alien.tolong, alien.tofloat, and alien.todouble are like alien.toint, but works with with the respective typecasts.
Unsigned versions are also available.
My issue with those, is I would need to go byte-by-byte, and there is no alien.tochar function. Also, and more importantly, this still doesn't solve the problem of me being able to get elements outside of the base address.
Buffers
After making a buffer you can pass it in place of any argument of
string or pointer type.
...
You can also pass a buffer or other userdata to the new method of your
struct type, and in this case this will be the backing store of the
struct instance you are creating. This is useful for unpacking a
foreign struct that a C function returned.
These seem to suggest I can use an alien.buffer as the argument of MODULEINFO's LPVOID lpBaseOfDll. And buffers are described as byte arrays, which can be indexed using this notation: buf[1], buf[2], etc. Additionally, buffers go by bytes, so this would ideally solve all problems. (If I am understanding this correctly).
Unfortunately, I can not find any examples of this anywhere (not in the docs, stackoverflow, Google, etc), so I am have no idea how to do this. I've tried a few variations of syntax, but nearly every one gives a runtime error (others simply does not work as expected).
Any insight on how I might be able to go byte-by-byte (C char-by-char) across the mod.lpBaseOfDll through dereferences and pointer arithmetic?
I need to go byte-by-byte, and there is no alien.tochar function.
Sounds like alien.tostring has you covered:
alien.tostring takes a userdata (usually returned from a function that has a pointer return value), casts it to char*, and returns a Lua string. You can supply an optional size argument (if you don’t Alien calls strlen on the buffer first).
Lua strings can contain arbitrary byte values, including 0 (i.e. they aren't null-terminated like C strings), so as long as you pass a size argument to alien.tostring you can get back data as a byte buffer, aka Lua string, and do whatever you please with the bytes.
It sounds like you can't tell it to start at an arbitrary offset from the given pointer address. The easiest way to tell for sure, if the documentation doesn't tell you, is to look at the source. It would probably be trivial to add an offset parameter.
I saw this question:
Fortran dynamic objects
and the accepted answer made me question if I wrote the following function safely (without allowing a memory leak)
function getValues3D(this) result(vals3D)
implicit none
type(allBCs),intent(in) :: this
real(dpn),dimension(:,:,:),pointer :: vals3D
integer,dimension(3) :: s
if (this%TF3D) then
s = shape(this%vals3D)
if (associated(this%vals3D)) then
stop "possible memory leak - p was associated"
endif
allocate(vals3D(s(1),s(2),s(3)))
vals3D = this%vals3D
else; call propertyNotAssigned('vals3D','getValues3D')
endif
end function
This warning shows up when I run my code, but shouldn't my this%vals3D be associated if it was previously (to this function) set? I'm currently running into memory errors, and they started showing up when I introduced a new module with this function in it.
Any help is greatly appreciated.
I think I wasn't specific enough. I would like to make the following class, and know how to implement the class, safely in terms of memory. That is:
module vectorField_mod
use constants_mod
implicit none
type vecField1D
private
real(dpn),dimension(:),pointer :: x
logical :: TFx = .false.
end type
contains
subroutine setX(this,x)
implicit none
type(vecField1D),intent(inout) :: this
real(dpn),dimension(:),target :: x
allocate(this%x(size(x)))
this%x = x
this%TFx = .true.
end subroutine
function getX(this) result(res)
implicit none
real(dpn),dimension(:),pointer :: res
type(vecField1D),intent(in) :: this
nullify(res)
allocate(res(size(this%x)))
if (this%TFx) then
res = this%x
endif
end function
end module
Where the following code tests this module
program testVectorField
use constants_mod
use vectorField_mod
implicit none
integer,parameter :: Nx = 150
real(dpn),parameter :: x_0 = 0.0
real(dpn),parameter :: x_N = 1.0
real(dpn),parameter :: dx = (x_N - x_0)/dble(Nx-1)
real(dpn),dimension(Nx) :: x = (/(x_0+dble(i)*dx,i=0,Nx-1)/)
real(dpn),dimension(Nx) :: f
real(dpn),dimension(:),pointer :: fp
type(vecField1D) :: f1
integer :: i
do i=1,Nx
f(i) = sin(x(i))
enddo
do i=1,10**5
call setX(f1,f) !
f = getX(f1) ! Should I use this?
fp = getX(f1) ! Or this?
fp => getX(f1) ! Or even this?
enddo
end program
Currently, I'm running on windows. When I CTR-ALT-DLT, and view performance, the "physical memory usage histery" increases with every loop iteration. This is why I assume that I have a memory leak.
So I would like to repose my question: Is this a memory leak? (The memory increases with every one of the above cases). If so, is there a way I avoid the memory leak while still using pointers? If not, then what is happening, should I be concerned and is there a way to reduce the severity of this behavior?
Sorry for the initial vague question. I hope this is more to the point.
Are you really restricted to Fortran 90? In Fortran 2003 you would use an allocatable function result for this. This is much safer. Using pointer function results, whether you have a memory leak with this code or not depends on how you reference the function, which you don't show. If you must return a pointer from a procedure, it is much safer to return it via a subroutine argument.
BUT...
This function is pointless. There's no point testing the association status of this%vals3D` after you've referenced it as the argument to SHAPE in the previous line. If the pointer component is disassocated (or has undefined pointer association status), then you are not permitted to reference it.
Further, if the pointer component is associated, all you do is call stop!
Perhaps you have transcribed the code to the question incorrectly?
If you simply delete the entire if construct starting with if (associated(this%vals3D))... then your code may make sense.
BUT...
if this%TF3D is true, then this%vals3D must be associated.
when you reference the function, you must use pointer assignment
array_ptr => getValues3D(foo)
! ^
! |
! + this little character is very important.
Forget that little character and you are using normal assignment. Syntactically valid, difficult to pick the difference when reading code and, in this case, potentially a source of memory corruption or leaks that might go undetected until the worst possible moment, in addition to the usual pitfalls of using pointers (e.g. you need to DEALLOCATE array_ptr before you reuse it or it goes out of scope). This is why functions returning pointer results are considered risky.
Your complete code shows several memory leaks. Every time you allocate something that is a POINTER - you need to pretty much guarantee that there will be a matching DEALLOCATE.
You have a loop in your test code. ALLOCATE gets called a lot - in both the setter and the getter. Where are the matching DEALLOCATE statements?
Every time setX is called, any previously allocated memory for the x component of your type will be leaked. Since you call the function 10^5 times, you will waste 100000-1 copies. If you know that the size of this%x will never change, simply check to see if a previous call had already allocated the memory by checking to see if ASSOCIATED(this%x) is true. If it is, skip the allocation and move directly to the assignment statement. If the size does change, then you will first have to deallocate the old copy before allocating new space.
Two other minor comments on setX: The TARGET attribute of the dummy argument x appears superfluous since you never take a pointer of that argument. Second, the TFx component of your type also seems superfluous since you can instead check if x is allocated.
For the function getX, why not skip the allocation completely, and merely set res => this%x? Admittedly, this will return a direct reference to the underlying data, which maybe you want to avoid.
In your loop,
do i=1,10**5
call setX(f1,f) !
f = getX(f1) ! Should I use this?
fp = getX(f1) ! Or this?
fp => getX(f1) ! Or even this?
enddo
fp => getX(f1) will allow you to obtain a pointer to the underlying x component of your type (if you adopt my change above). The other two use assignment operators and will copy data from the result of getX into either f, or (if it is previously allocated) fp. If fp is not allocated, the code will crash.
If you do not want to grant direct access to the underlying data, then I suggest that the return value of getX should be defined as an automatic array with the size determined by this%x. That is, you can write the function as
function getX(this) result(res)
implicit none
type(vecField1D),intent(in) :: this
real(dpn),dimension(size(this%x,1)) :: res
res = this%x
end function
my program is as follows:
module x
use mpi !x includes mpi module
implicit none
...
contains
subroutine do_something_with_mpicommworld
!use mpi !uncommenting this makes a difference (****)
call MPI_...(MPI_COMM_WORLD,...,ierr)
end subroutine
...
end module x
program main
use mpi
use x
MPI_INIT(...)
call do_something_with_mpicommworld
end program main
This program fails with the following error: MPI_Cart_create(199): Invalid communicator, unless
the line marked with (**) is uncommented.
Now, maybe my knowledge of Fortran 90 is incomplete, but i thought if you have a use clause in the module definition (see my module x), whichever global variable exists in the included module (in case of x : MPI_COMM_WORLD from include module mpi) will have the same value in any of the contained subroutines ( do_something_with_mpicommworld ) even when those subroutines do not explicitly include the module (e.g. when (**) is commented out). Or, to put it simply, if you include a module within another module, the subroutines contained in the second module will have access to the globals in the included module without a special use statement.
When I ran my programme, I saw a different behaviour. The sub contained in x was creating errors unless it had the 'use mpi' statement.
So what is the problem, do I have a wrong idea about Fortran 90, or is there something special about MPI module which induces such behaviour?
Its annoyingly hard to find exact details about what should and shouldn't happen in these cases, and my expectation was the same as yours -- the `use mpi' should work as above. So I tried the following:
module hellompi
use mpi
implicit none
contains
subroutine hello
integer :: ierr, nprocs, rank
call MPI_INIT(ierr)
call MPI_COMM_SIZE(MPI_COMM_WORLD, nprocs, ierr)
call MPI_COMM_RANK(MPI_COMM_WORLD, rank, ierr)
print *, 'Hello world, from ', rank, ' of ', nprocs
print *, MPI_COMM_WORLD
call MPI_FINALIZE(ierr)
return
end subroutine hello
end module hellompi
and it works fine under both gfortran and ifort with OpenMPI. Adding a cart_create doesn't change anything.
What strikes me as weird with your case is that it isn't complaining that MPI_COMM_WORLD isn't defined -- so obviously some of the relevant information is being propagated to the subroutine. Can you post a simpler full example which still fails to work?
Thank you Johnatan for your answer. The problem was really, really simple. I added the subroutine in question after the "end module"
:-D, 'implicit none' did not apply to now external sub and compiler happily initialised a brand new variable MPI_COMM_WORLD to whatever it thought suitable following the standard implicit rules.
This is just a lesson to me to enforce 'implicit none' not only by keywords, but also via the compiler flag. Evil lurks after every end statement.
I'm sorry you went trough the trouble of making the test example, I'd buy you a beer if I could :-)