Philippe Waroquiers noticed a memory leak in gdb, which he tracked
down to a bug in splay-tree. splay_tree_remove does not call the
`delete_key' function when it removes the old node; but it should.
I looked at every splay tree in GCC and there is only one that passes
a non-NULL delete function -- the one in lto.c. That file does not
call splay_tree_remove. So, I think this is safe to check in.
I re-ran the LTO tests to double check.
libiberty/
* splay-tree.c (splay_tree_remove): Delete the key if necessary.
---
libiberty/ChangeLog | 4 ++++
libiberty/splay-tree.c | 2 ++
2 files changed, 6 insertions(+)
diff --git a/libiberty/ChangeLog b/libiberty/ChangeLog
index bcc0227bdd8..1eb25f928f2 100644
--- a/libiberty/ChangeLog
+++ b/libiberty/ChangeLog
@@ -1,3 +1,7 @@
+2019-01-18 Tom Tromey <[email protected]>
+
+ * splay-tree.c (splay_tree_remove): Delete the key if necessary.
+
2019-01-14 Tom Honermann <[email protected]>
* cp-demangle.c (cplus_demangle_builtin_types)
diff --git a/libiberty/splay-tree.c b/libiberty/splay-tree.c
index 920e68db2cb..21d23c38dfc 100644
--- a/libiberty/splay-tree.c
+++ b/libiberty/splay-tree.c
@@ -425,6 +425,8 @@ splay_tree_remove (splay_tree sp, splay_tree_key key)
right = sp->root->right;
/* Delete the root node itself. */
+ if (sp->delete_key)
+ (*sp->delete_key) (sp->root->key);
if (sp->delete_value)
(*sp->delete_value) (sp->root->value);
(*sp->deallocate) (sp->root, sp->allocate_data);
--
2.17.2