分段错误(核心转储)错误
我正在编写一个程序,它使用链接列表的哈希表来计算单词的频率。该程序将计算我输入的所有单词以及频率,但是在打印哈希表后,我收到分段错误(核心转储)错误。当我对我的程序进行 valgrind 时,它显示我在三个不同的地方遇到错误,这些错误是大小 8 的无效读取。但我不知道如何修复它们。这是三个不同的地方:
void freeTable(HashTablePtr table) {
int i;
ListPtr list;
if (table == NULL)
return;
for (i = 0; i < table->size; i++) {
list = table->table[i];
freeList(list);
}
free(table->table);
free(table);
}
HashTablePtr createTable(int tableSize) {
int i;
HashTablePtr table = (HashTablePtr) malloc(sizeof(HashTablePtr));
table->table = (ListPtr *) malloc(sizeof(ListPtr) * tableSize);
table->size = tableSize;
for (i = 0; i < table->size; i++) {
table->table[i] = createList();
}
return table;
}
void printTable(HashTablePtr table) {
ListPtr tempList;
NodePtr tempNode;
HashObjectPtr obj;
int i;
for (i = 1; i < table->size; i++) {
tempList = table->table[i];
if (tempList->size != 0) {
tempNode = tempList->head;
obj = tempNode->HashObject;
printf("%s\n\n", toString(obj));
}
}
}
我认为错误是由于使用这些行造成的:
tempList = 表->表[i];
表->表[i] = createList();
但我不知道如何解决它。
编辑:
typedef struct hashtable HashTable;
typedef struct hashtable * HashTablePtr;
struct hashtable {
int size;
ListPtr *table;
};
Valgrind 错误:
上下文 5 中的 999 个错误(共 9 个):
==73795== 大小 8 的读取无效
==73795== 在 0x400B7D: printTable (HashTable.c:96)
==73795== 0x400766:主要(wf.c:16)
==73795== 地址 0x4c34048 是分配大小为 8 的块之后的 0 个字节
==73795== 在 0x4A0515D: malloc (vg_replace_malloc.c:195)
==73795== 由 0x400D05: createTable (HashTable.c:17)
==73795== by 0x400753: main (wf.c:14)
==73795==
==73795==
==73795== 上下文 6(共 9 个)中有 1000 个错误:
==73795== 大小 8 的读取无效
==73795== 在 0x400B2B: freeTable (HashTable.c:128)
==73795== by 0x40076E: main (wf.c:17)
==73795== 地址 0x4c34048 是分配大小为 8 的块之后的 0 个字节
==73795== 在 0x4A0515D: malloc (vg_replace_malloc.c:195)
==73795== 由 0x400D05: createTable (HashTable.c:17)
==73795== by 0x400753: main (wf.c:14)
==73795==
==73795==
==73795== 上下文第 7 个错误(共 9 个)中有 1000 个错误:
==73795== 大小 8 的读取无效
==73795== 在 0x400D4C: createTable (HashTable.c:25)
==73795== by 0x400753: main (wf.c:14)
==73795== 地址 0x4c34048 是分配大小为 8 的块之后的 0 个字节
==73795== 在 0x4A0515D: malloc (vg_replace_malloc.c:195)
==73795== 由 0x400D05: createTable (HashTable.c:17)
==73795== by 0x400753: main (wf.c:14)
ListPtr createList() {
ListPtr list;
list = (ListPtr) malloc(sizeof(List));
list->size = 0;
list->head = NULL;
list->tail = NULL;
return list;
}
I'm writing a program that uses a Hashtable of linked lists to count the frequency of words. The program will count all the words that I enter along with the frequency however after printing the hashtable, I get a segmentation fault (core dumped) error. When I valgrind my program, it shows that I get errors in three different places that are Invalid read of size 8. I'm not sure how to fix them though. Here are the three different places:
void freeTable(HashTablePtr table) {
int i;
ListPtr list;
if (table == NULL)
return;
for (i = 0; i < table->size; i++) {
list = table->table[i];
freeList(list);
}
free(table->table);
free(table);
}
HashTablePtr createTable(int tableSize) {
int i;
HashTablePtr table = (HashTablePtr) malloc(sizeof(HashTablePtr));
table->table = (ListPtr *) malloc(sizeof(ListPtr) * tableSize);
table->size = tableSize;
for (i = 0; i < table->size; i++) {
table->table[i] = createList();
}
return table;
}
void printTable(HashTablePtr table) {
ListPtr tempList;
NodePtr tempNode;
HashObjectPtr obj;
int i;
for (i = 1; i < table->size; i++) {
tempList = table->table[i];
if (tempList->size != 0) {
tempNode = tempList->head;
obj = tempNode->HashObject;
printf("%s\n\n", toString(obj));
}
}
}
I think that the error has to due with using these lines:
tempList = table->table[i];
table->table[i] = createList();
but I'm not sure how to fix it.
Edit:
typedef struct hashtable HashTable;
typedef struct hashtable * HashTablePtr;
struct hashtable {
int size;
ListPtr *table;
};
Valgrind errors:
999 errors in context 5 of 9:
==73795== Invalid read of size 8
==73795== at 0x400B7D: printTable (HashTable.c:96)
==73795== by 0x400766: main (wf.c:16)
==73795== Address 0x4c34048 is 0 bytes after a block of size 8 alloc'd
==73795== at 0x4A0515D: malloc (vg_replace_malloc.c:195)
==73795== by 0x400D05: createTable (HashTable.c:17)
==73795== by 0x400753: main (wf.c:14)
==73795==
==73795==
==73795== 1000 errors in context 6 of 9:
==73795== Invalid read of size 8
==73795== at 0x400B2B: freeTable (HashTable.c:128)
==73795== by 0x40076E: main (wf.c:17)
==73795== Address 0x4c34048 is 0 bytes after a block of size 8 alloc'd
==73795== at 0x4A0515D: malloc (vg_replace_malloc.c:195)
==73795== by 0x400D05: createTable (HashTable.c:17)
==73795== by 0x400753: main (wf.c:14)
==73795==
==73795==
==73795== 1000 errors in context 7 of 9:
==73795== Invalid read of size 8
==73795== at 0x400D4C: createTable (HashTable.c:25)
==73795== by 0x400753: main (wf.c:14)
==73795== Address 0x4c34048 is 0 bytes after a block of size 8 alloc'd
==73795== at 0x4A0515D: malloc (vg_replace_malloc.c:195)
==73795== by 0x400D05: createTable (HashTable.c:17)
==73795== by 0x400753: main (wf.c:14)
ListPtr createList() {
ListPtr list;
list = (ListPtr) malloc(sizeof(List));
list->size = 0;
list->head = NULL;
list->tail = NULL;
return list;
}
如果你对这篇内容有疑问,欢迎到本站社区发帖提问 参与讨论,获取更多帮助,或者扫码二维码加入 Web 技术交流群。
绑定邮箱获取回复消息
由于您还没有绑定你的真实邮箱,如果其他用户或者作者回复了您的评论,将不能在第一时间通知您!
发布评论
评论(2)
HashTablePtr table = (HashTablePtr) malloc(sizeof(HashTablePtr));
几乎肯定是错误的。您想为 HashTable 分配足够的存储空间,但似乎您只是为指向 HashTable 的指针(您的HashTablePtr
)分配存储空间,如果您放弃 typedef'ing 指针的习惯,而是遵循采用以下形式分配的方法,您不会遇到此类问题:
The
HashTablePtr table = (HashTablePtr) malloc(sizeof(HashTablePtr));
is almost certainly wrong. You want to allocate enough storage for a HashTable, but it seems you're allocating storage for just a pointer to a HashTable(yourHashTablePtr
)If you drop the habit of typedef'ing pointer and instead follow the approach of allocating in the following form, you won't get into that sort of problems:
指针的大小始终是固定大小并且取决于体系结构。例如,在 64 位平台上,它始终为 8 字节。基本上,
sizeof (ObjectType)
与sizeof (ObjectType *)
不同。因此,在这种情况下,您最终分配的内存比您需要的要少,这会导致分段错误。Size of a pointer is always a fixed size and is architecture dependent. On 64-bit platforms, for example, it is always 8 bytes. Basically,
sizeof (ObjectType)
is not the same assizeof (ObjectType *)
. So in this case you end up allocating less memory than you need which leads to segmentation faults.