Fix JNI leak on copy to device #10229
Merged
Conversation
This file contains 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
revans2
added
bug
jlowe
reviewed
Feb 7, 2022
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## branch-22.04 #10229 +/- ##
================================================
+ Coverage 10.42% 10.47% +0.04%
================================================
Files 119 122 +3
Lines 20603 20502 -101
================================================
- Hits 2148 2147 -1
+ Misses 18455 18355 -100
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
jlowe
approved these changes
Feb 7, 2022
|
@gpucibot merge |
vyasr
added
4 - Needs Review
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
We were not closing intermediate column view handles when copying nested data from the device to the host. I think we could completely replace
NestedColumnVectorwithColumnViewin the future, but it would require some optimizations inColumnViewto make it happen cleanly, so I didn't do any of that here.I also renamed one of the methods that had a leak so it would be more clear what it was doing, and I marked it as private so it would be less likely to leak out and be used by other code.