gtkmm and Maemo 5

There’s a decent number of examples of Maemo 5 applications written in C or even python, but there’s not too many real-world applications in (non-Qt) C++. So I’ve written up a quick, cliché little demo app in gtkmm/hildonmm. It probably isn’t useful for much other than perhaps as an example (who really needs dedicated application for splitting a bill anyway?). But I thought I’d put a git repository online in case it’s useful for somebody.


How to waste an evening debugging the internals of glib’s qsort implementation

Working on a personal itch-scratching project, I found myself wanting a sortable treeview. So I stuffed my treemodel into a TreeModelSort and set up my sort functions, and everything was happy. Except, when running my application, I kept getting strange segfaults within glib’s qsort implementation. I had set the following function as my sort_func (yes, it’s C++, but it should be fairly self-explanatory):

static int
compare_foo (const Gtk::TreeModel::iterator& a, const Gtk::TreeModel::iterator& b)
    std::tr1::shared_ptr<Foo> l1, l2;
    l1 = a->get_value (COLUMN_FOO);
    l2 = b->get_value (COLUMN_FOO);

    if (!l1)
        return -1;

    if (!l2)
        return 1;

    return l1->get_id () - l2->get_id ();

Can you spot the error? Running it under valgrind indicated that I was reading data from *before* the start of the array that was being sorted. In fact, the following lines of code in g_qsort_with_data() were causing tmp_ptr to be decreased back past the start of the array:

        while ((*compare_func) ((void *) run_ptr, (void *) tmp_ptr, user_data) < 0)
          tmp_ptr -= size;

Hmm. Why is there no guard to prevent tmp_ptr from being decreased past the start? Then I noticed the following comment up a few lines:

    /* Find smallest element in first threshold and place it at the
       array's beginning.  This is the smallest array element,
       and the operation speeds up insertion sort's inner loop. */

So at this point, the code is assuming that the very first element of the array is the smallest, so compare_func should always return >= 0 when it reaches the start of the array. Aha! So the problem is my compare_func. It turns out I forgot to handle the single case of both values being NULL.

    l1 = a->get_value (COLUMN_FOO);
    l2 = b->get_value (COLUMN_FOO);
+   if (!l1 && !l2)
+       return 0;

    if (!l1)
        return -1;

So there’s not really a big lesson to be learned here, but if you ever hit strange segfaults deep inside glib’s qsort while sorting a treemodel, do yourself a favor and double-check that your sort function is sane first. Also, do yourself a favor and run it under valgrind as soon as you get a strange segfault. Knowing the exact point of the invalid read is infinitely more helpful than waiting until that invalid read causes a segfault.