-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 55
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Memory unsafety after deepcopy of plan #261
Comments
Yeah, I would just return the original plan object? (Except that the plans aren't quite immutable, they include e.g. a See also FFTW/fftw3#106 which would be required for a "true" |
Could the mutable |
Yes, seems like there could be a race condition if two threads try to update |
I think I agree that the easy thing for now is to fix the crash by adding the methods:
Later you could consider adding a lock, or a "true" |
After pondering this a bit more, perhaps implementing |
Now that FFTW/fftw3#106 is closed, is it possible to add |
Gentle ping. Can |
We need to build a new FFTW release. |
The following will segfault on my machine:
Since FFTW plans are immutable, a quick fix might be to have
deepcopy
return the original plan,Alternatively, attempting to
deepcopy
an FFTW plan could throw an error explaining thatdeepcopy
cannot be used in conjunction with bindings to C libraries.Tested on FFTW v1.5.0 with Julia 1.9 beta 4:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: