On Sat, Jun 29, 2019 at 5:31 PM CHU Zhaowei <m...@jhdxr.com> wrote:
> Thanks for the example. Now I understand the root cause. There is a
> similar bug report(https://bugs.php.net/bug.php?id=74938) for anonymous
> function. I thought it leaked for the same reason, but now I think I’m
> wrong. We don’t have to create new classes for them since they are all
> instances of Closure class, and it’s not possible to create opaque
> reference for functions. __FUNCTION__ returns “{closure}”. Could you take
> a look?
>
This leaks for the same reason (function definition is not garbage
collected), but in this case we could indeed implement the garbage
collection without any observable changes to semantics. I don't think it
will be simple to do this though.
Back to the anonymous class, I’m thinking if we can have any workaround
> for this issue, otherwise it will be a huge problem if someone wants to
> write applications running for a long time. It will be a memory leak that
> cannot be fixed in userland code unless he decides to drop anonymous class
> at all.
>
I think you got caught up in a wrong premise here: Just using anonymous
classes does not cause leaks. The problem here is that OP is *creating*
many classes (the fact that they are anonymous ultimately doesn't matter)
by eval'ing code. That is what causes the leak. Unless you are doing
something like this (which you obviously shouldn't, for more reasons than
this), there is nothing to worry about. As such, I don't really think there
is a problem worth solving here.
Nikita
Since most of the use cases should not have opaque references, can we add a
> flag in zval to indicate if an object has this kind of reference? The
> number of methods to create such opaque references should be limited.
> __CLASS__, get_class(), reflections, clone. Did I miss any other way? With
> the help of this flag, we are able to know if it’s safe to remove the class
> definition during destruction.
>
Regards,
>
> CHU Zhaowei
>
>
>
> *From:* Nikita Popov <nikita....@gmail.com>
> *Sent:* Saturday, June 29, 2019 3:58 PM
> *To:* CHU Zhaowei <m...@jhdxr.com>
> *Cc:* Stanislav Malyshev <smalys...@gmail.com>; Benjamin Morel <
> benjamin.mo...@gmail.com>; PHP Internals <internals@lists.php.net>
> *Subject:* Re: [PHP-DEV] Memory leak in eval()'d code
>
>
>
> On Sat, Jun 29, 2019 at 9:07 AM CHU Zhaowei <m...@jhdxr.com> wrote:
>
> I think we missed the point here. Clousre, or anonymous class, should not
> be considered as normal class. We expect normal class existing once we
> declare it till end of script. However, for anonymous class, it's usually
> used within certain scope, so not only the instances, the class itself
> should be included in the GC as well.
> I guess the problem here is we didn't GC the space for definition of
> anonymous classes.
>
> Regards,
> CHU Zhaowei
>
>
>
> As Johannes already pointed out, we cannot garbage collect anonymous class
> definitions due to the existence of opaque references. A simple example of
> code that currently works:
>
>
>
> $obj = eval('return new class {}');
>
> $class = get_class($obj); // create opaque reference
>
> unset($obj); // drop last direct reference
>
> $obj = new $class;
>
>
>
> In the end, an anonymous class is essentially a class with a random name
> and some inline construction sugar, but apart from that does not differ
> from ordinary classes. (I've also seen some calls to allow syntax like
> $class = class {}; that would make that even more obvious.)
>
>
>
> The situation here would be different if we had first-class classes and
> did not refer to classes by name. But as-is, I don't think garbage
> collecting anonymous classes is a possibility.
>
>
>
> Nikita
>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Stanislav Malyshev <smalys...@gmail.com>
> > Sent: Saturday, June 29, 2019 6:52 AM
> > To: Benjamin Morel <benjamin.mo...@gmail.com>
> > Cc: PHP Internals <internals@lists.php.net>
> > Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] Memory leak in eval()'d code
> >
> >
> >
> > On 6/28/19 3:37 PM, Benjamin Morel wrote:
> > > That's not a "leak". You create new objects (in this case,
> classes),
> > > they take memory.
> > >
> > >
> > > Why do they not "leak" memory without eval() then? Replace with
> > > `$object = new class {};` and memory usage stays flat.
> > > There has do be some kind of garbage collection for these anonymous
> classes.
> >
> > AFAIR this does not create new classes, since it's the same code, and
> same code
> > means same class. But eval() has new code every time, thus new class.
> Generally
> > I don't think PHP has any operation that can destroy an existing class.
> It won't be
> > easy too since you don't know whether there are any objects of this class
> > around (unless you're in shutdown).
> >
> > --
> > Stas Malyshev
> > smalys...@gmail.com
> >
> > --
> > PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List To unsubscribe,
> visit:
> > http://www.php.net/unsub.php
> >
>
>
>
>
> --
> PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>
>
