-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 31.9k
gh-129005: Fix buffer expansion in _pyio.FileIO.readall #129541
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
Closed
Closed
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
1 change: 1 addition & 0 deletions
1
Misc/NEWS.d/next/Library/2025-01-31-19-07-31.gh-issue-129005.II6go0.rst
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -0,0 +1 @@ | ||
:mod:`!pyio`: Fix expansion of buffer in _pyio.FileIO.readall |
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Why not just
b'\0' * addend
?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
That uses a lot more memory (And overall goal is to get
_io
and_pyio
to use the same).result
is expanded in length byaddend
bytes, a newbytes
is constructed which is of lengthaddend
containing just null, then there's amemcpy
from the new temporary bytes object toresult
... That means get 2xaddend
memory usage, rather than just expanding the buffer byaddend
bytes.In this case,
bytearray.extend
also doesn't prefer working in place / creates aPyByteArray_FromStringAndSize
that it copies the data out of a iterator on the object passed to it as an argument...My preference is definitely
bytearray.resize
which does what I'd need here, but didn't want that to be a blocker for getting bots back to green (#129560). Reading through the slice, extend, append, etc. code inbytearray
haven't found any other efficient ways to just "expand capacity, in place if possible without multiplying existing space" and (ideally) without requiring a by-byte write to every byte (the read loop is about to do that anyways).