[plt-scheme] scheme_add_managed with FFI

Matthew told me to change

(add-managed p (lambda (p _) (my-close p)) #f #f)

to

(add-managed p my-close #f #f)

where my-close lives at top-level so that the lambda won't get garbage 
collected. I just tried that. No. Segfault still happens. Could anyone 
(Eli or Matthew) please help again? Many thanks.

Also, should I make a small example that can reproduce the problem?

Chongkai

Chongkai Zhu wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> In one of my programs, I need to use custodian to manage some 
> resource. So I wrote the following:
>
> (define add-managed
>  (get-ffi-obj "scheme_add_managed" #f
>               (_fun (_pointer = #f) _scheme (_fun _scheme _pointer -> 
> _void) _pointer _bool -> _pointer)))
>
> ...
>
> (add-managed p (lambda (p _) (my-close p)) #f #f)
>
> A side note: here p itself is a _pointer (print as #<cpointer>) 
> returned from some other FFI call.
>
> If I run the program for long enough, adding objects under the manage 
> of custodians, and closing custodians once a while, with other process 
> (other than PLT) actively using memory, eventually a segfault will 
> happen when I'm shutdown a custodian (which has some p under it's 
> management). Testing shows the segfault is related to my 
> `add-managed', as commenting it the segfault also disappears.
>
> I noticed in 
> http://schemecookbook.org/Cookbook/PLTCustodianRegistration, the FFI 
> type of scheme_add_managed is different from how I use it. Did I do 
> something wrong using scheme_add_managed this way? Why does the 
> segfault happen? Could anyone help elaborate? Thanks in advance.
>
> Sincerely,
> Chongkai
> _________________________________________________
>  For list-related administrative tasks:
>  http://list.cs.brown.edu/mailman/listinfo/plt-scheme