当我运行我的（C++）程序时，它会因这个错误而崩溃。
* 检测到 glibc * ./load: 双重释放或损坏 (!prev): 0x0000000000c6ed50 ***
如何追踪错误？
我尝试使用 print ( std::cout) 语句，但没有成功。可以gdb让这更容易吗？
问问题
326343 次
9 回答
70
如果您使用 glibc，您可以将MALLOC_CHECK_环境变量设置为2，这将导致 glibc 使用 的容错版本malloc，这将导致您的程序在完成双重释放时中止。
set environment MALLOC_CHECK_ 2您可以在运行程序之前使用命令从 gdb 设置它；程序应该中止，free()调用在回溯中可见。
有关更多信息，请参见手册页malloc()
于 2010-05-25T08:42:25.540 回答
38
至少有两种可能的情况：
- 您要删除同一个实体两次
- 您正在删除未分配的内容
对于第一个，我强烈建议对所有已删除的指针进行 NULL 处理。
你有三个选择：
- 重载 new 并删除并跟踪分配
- 是的，使用 gdb——然后你会从你的崩溃中得到一个回溯，这可能会很有帮助
- 正如建议的那样——使用 Valgrind——这并不容易进入，但它会在未来为你节省一千倍的时间......
于 2010-05-25T05:02:12.847 回答
24
三个基本规则：
- 将指针设置为
NULL释放后 NULL释放前检查。- 在开始时初始化指针
NULL。
这三者的结合效果很好。
于 2010-05-25T06:24:41.573 回答
18
您可以使用valgrind它来调试它。
#include<stdio.h>
#include<stdlib.h>
int main()
{
char *x = malloc(100);
free(x);
free(x);
return 0;
}
[sand@PS-CNTOS-64-S11 testbox]$ vim t1.c
[sand@PS-CNTOS-64-S11 testbox]$ cc -g t1.c -o t1
[sand@PS-CNTOS-64-S11 testbox]$ ./t1
*** glibc detected *** ./t1: double free or corruption (top): 0x00000000058f7010 ***
======= Backtrace: =========
/lib64/libc.so.6[0x3a3127245f]
/lib64/libc.so.6(cfree+0x4b)[0x3a312728bb]
./t1[0x400500]
/lib64/libc.so.6(__libc_start_main+0xf4)[0x3a3121d994]
./t1[0x400429]
======= Memory map: ========
00400000-00401000 r-xp 00000000 68:02 30246184 /home/sand/testbox/t1
00600000-00601000 rw-p 00000000 68:02 30246184 /home/sand/testbox/t1
058f7000-05918000 rw-p 058f7000 00:00 0 [heap]
3a30e00000-3a30e1c000 r-xp 00000000 68:03 5308733 /lib64/ld-2.5.so
3a3101b000-3a3101c000 r--p 0001b000 68:03 5308733 /lib64/ld-2.5.so
3a3101c000-3a3101d000 rw-p 0001c000 68:03 5308733 /lib64/ld-2.5.so
3a31200000-3a3134e000 r-xp 00000000 68:03 5310248 /lib64/libc-2.5.so
3a3134e000-3a3154e000 ---p 0014e000 68:03 5310248 /lib64/libc-2.5.so
3a3154e000-3a31552000 r--p 0014e000 68:03 5310248 /lib64/libc-2.5.so
3a31552000-3a31553000 rw-p 00152000 68:03 5310248 /lib64/libc-2.5.so
3a31553000-3a31558000 rw-p 3a31553000 00:00 0
3a41c00000-3a41c0d000 r-xp 00000000 68:03 5310264 /lib64/libgcc_s-4.1.2-20080825.so.1
3a41c0d000-3a41e0d000 ---p 0000d000 68:03 5310264 /lib64/libgcc_s-4.1.2-20080825.so.1
3a41e0d000-3a41e0e000 rw-p 0000d000 68:03 5310264 /lib64/libgcc_s-4.1.2-20080825.so.1
2b1912300000-2b1912302000 rw-p 2b1912300000 00:00 0
2b191231c000-2b191231d000 rw-p 2b191231c000 00:00 0
7ffffe214000-7ffffe229000 rw-p 7ffffffe9000 00:00 0 [stack]
7ffffe2b0000-7ffffe2b4000 r-xp 7ffffe2b0000 00:00 0 [vdso]
ffffffffff600000-ffffffffffe00000 ---p 00000000 00:00 0 [vsyscall]
Aborted
[sand@PS-CNTOS-64-S11 testbox]$
[sand@PS-CNTOS-64-S11 testbox]$ vim t1.c
[sand@PS-CNTOS-64-S11 testbox]$ cc -g t1.c -o t1
[sand@PS-CNTOS-64-S11 testbox]$ valgrind --tool=memcheck ./t1
==20859== Memcheck, a memory error detector
==20859== Copyright (C) 2002-2009, and GNU GPL'd, by Julian Seward et al.
==20859== Using Valgrind-3.5.0 and LibVEX; rerun with -h for copyright info
==20859== Command: ./t1
==20859==
==20859== Invalid free() / delete / delete[]
==20859== at 0x4A05A31: free (vg_replace_malloc.c:325)
==20859== by 0x4004FF: main (t1.c:8)
==20859== Address 0x4c26040 is 0 bytes inside a block of size 100 free'd
==20859== at 0x4A05A31: free (vg_replace_malloc.c:325)
==20859== by 0x4004F6: main (t1.c:7)
==20859==
==20859==
==20859== HEAP SUMMARY:
==20859== in use at exit: 0 bytes in 0 blocks
==20859== total heap usage: 1 allocs, 2 frees, 100 bytes allocated
==20859==
==20859== All heap blocks were freed -- no leaks are possible
==20859==
==20859== For counts of detected and suppressed errors, rerun with: -v
==20859== ERROR SUMMARY: 1 errors from 1 contexts (suppressed: 4 from 4)
[sand@PS-CNTOS-64-S11 testbox]$
[sand@PS-CNTOS-64-S11 testbox]$ valgrind --tool=memcheck --leak-check=full ./t1
==20899== Memcheck, a memory error detector
==20899== Copyright (C) 2002-2009, and GNU GPL'd, by Julian Seward et al.
==20899== Using Valgrind-3.5.0 and LibVEX; rerun with -h for copyright info
==20899== Command: ./t1
==20899==
==20899== Invalid free() / delete / delete[]
==20899== at 0x4A05A31: free (vg_replace_malloc.c:325)
==20899== by 0x4004FF: main (t1.c:8)
==20899== Address 0x4c26040 is 0 bytes inside a block of size 100 free'd
==20899== at 0x4A05A31: free (vg_replace_malloc.c:325)
==20899== by 0x4004F6: main (t1.c:7)
==20899==
==20899==
==20899== HEAP SUMMARY:
==20899== in use at exit: 0 bytes in 0 blocks
==20899== total heap usage: 1 allocs, 2 frees, 100 bytes allocated
==20899==
==20899== All heap blocks were freed -- no leaks are possible
==20899==
==20899== For counts of detected and suppressed errors, rerun with: -v
==20899== ERROR SUMMARY: 1 errors from 1 contexts (suppressed: 4 from 4)
[sand@PS-CNTOS-64-S11 testbox]$
一种可能的解决方法：
#include<stdio.h>
#include<stdlib.h>
int main()
{
char *x = malloc(100);
free(x);
x=NULL;
free(x);
return 0;
}
[sand@PS-CNTOS-64-S11 testbox]$ vim t1.c
[sand@PS-CNTOS-64-S11 testbox]$ cc -g t1.c -o t1
[sand@PS-CNTOS-64-S11 testbox]$ ./t1
[sand@PS-CNTOS-64-S11 testbox]$
[sand@PS-CNTOS-64-S11 testbox]$ valgrind --tool=memcheck --leak-check=full ./t1
==20958== Memcheck, a memory error detector
==20958== Copyright (C) 2002-2009, and GNU GPL'd, by Julian Seward et al.
==20958== Using Valgrind-3.5.0 and LibVEX; rerun with -h for copyright info
==20958== Command: ./t1
==20958==
==20958==
==20958== HEAP SUMMARY:
==20958== in use at exit: 0 bytes in 0 blocks
==20958== total heap usage: 1 allocs, 1 frees, 100 bytes allocated
==20958==
==20958== All heap blocks were freed -- no leaks are possible
==20958==
==20958== For counts of detected and suppressed errors, rerun with: -v
==20958== ERROR SUMMARY: 0 errors from 0 contexts (suppressed: 4 from 4)
[sand@PS-CNTOS-64-S11 testbox]$
查看有关使用 Valgrind Link的博客
于 2013-03-18T05:29:40.500 回答
15
使用现代 C++ 编译器，您可以使用消毒剂进行跟踪。
示例：
我的程序：
$cat d_free.cxx
#include<iostream>
using namespace std;
int main()
{
int * i = new int();
delete i;
//i = NULL;
delete i;
}
使用地址清理程序编译：
# g++-7.1 d_free.cxx -Wall -Werror -fsanitize=address -g
执行 ：
# ./a.out
=================================================================
==4836==ERROR: AddressSanitizer: attempting double-free on 0x602000000010 in thread T0:
#0 0x7f35b2d7b3c8 in operator delete(void*, unsigned long) /media/sf_shared/gcc-7.1.0/libsanitizer/asan/asan_new_delete.cc:140
#1 0x400b2c in main /media/sf_shared/jkr/cpp/d_free/d_free.cxx:11
#2 0x7f35b2050c04 in __libc_start_main (/lib64/libc.so.6+0x21c04)
#3 0x400a08 (/media/sf_shared/jkr/cpp/d_free/a.out+0x400a08)
0x602000000010 is located 0 bytes inside of 4-byte region [0x602000000010,0x602000000014)
freed by thread T0 here:
#0 0x7f35b2d7b3c8 in operator delete(void*, unsigned long) /media/sf_shared/gcc-7.1.0/libsanitizer/asan/asan_new_delete.cc:140
#1 0x400b1b in main /media/sf_shared/jkr/cpp/d_free/d_free.cxx:9
#2 0x7f35b2050c04 in __libc_start_main (/lib64/libc.so.6+0x21c04)
previously allocated by thread T0 here:
#0 0x7f35b2d7a040 in operator new(unsigned long) /media/sf_shared/gcc-7.1.0/libsanitizer/asan/asan_new_delete.cc:80
#1 0x400ac9 in main /media/sf_shared/jkr/cpp/d_free/d_free.cxx:8
#2 0x7f35b2050c04 in __libc_start_main (/lib64/libc.so.6+0x21c04)
SUMMARY: AddressSanitizer: double-free /media/sf_shared/gcc-7.1.0/libsanitizer/asan/asan_new_delete.cc:140 in operator delete(void*, unsigned long)
==4836==ABORTING
于 2017-11-21T15:12:04.763 回答
5
您是否使用诸如 Boost 之类的智能指针shared_ptr？如果是这样，请通过调用来检查您是否在任何地方直接使用原始指针get()。我发现这是一个相当普遍的问题。
例如，想象一个场景，其中将原始指针（例如，可能作为回调处理程序）传递给您的代码。您可能决定将其分配给智能指针以应对引用计数等问题。大错误：您的代码不拥有此指针，除非您进行深层复制。当您的代码使用智能指针完成后，它将销毁它并尝试销毁它指向的内存，因为它认为没有其他人需要它，但是调用代码将尝试删除它，您将得到一个 double免费的问题。
当然，这可能不是你的问题。这是最简单的例子，它展示了它是如何发生的。第一次删除很好，但编译器感觉到它已经删除了该内存并导致问题。这就是为什么在删除后立即将 0 分配给指针是一个好主意。
int main(int argc, char* argv[])
{
char* ptr = new char[20];
delete[] ptr;
ptr = 0; // Comment me out and watch me crash and burn.
delete[] ptr;
}
编辑：更改delete为delete[]，因为 ptr 是一个字符数组。
于 2010-05-25T10:14:28.010 回答
0
就我而言，当我的程序CUDA 10.0的依赖项与CUDA 10.2 (cudart.10.2.so). 这种不一致对我来说造成了“双重自由或腐败”。
您可以使用ldd <your program>来查看依赖项中是否存在多个版本的 CUDA 库。
于 2021-10-08T07:14:03.043 回答
-4
我知道这是一个非常古老的线程，但它是该错误的顶级谷歌搜索，并且没有任何回复提到错误的常见原因。
这是关闭您已经关闭的文件。
如果你不注意并且有两个不同的函数关闭同一个文件，那么第二个函数会产生这个错误。
于 2017-10-04T15:44:54.537 回答