我想知道malloc和free是怎么工作的。
int main() {
unsigned char *p = (unsigned char*)malloc(4*sizeof(unsigned char));
memset(p,0,4);
strcpy((char*)p,"abcdabcd"); // **deliberately storing 8bytes**
cout << p;
free(p); // Obvious Crash, but I need how it works and why crash.
cout << p;
return 0;
}
如果答案是在记忆层面上的深度，如果可能的话，我会非常感激。
当前回答
malloc/free的一个实现如下所示:
通过sbrk() (Unix调用)从操作系统获取一块内存。 在该内存块周围创建一个页眉和页脚，并提供一些信息，如大小、权限以及下一个和上一个块的位置。 当传入对malloc的调用时，引用一个指向适当大小的块的列表。 然后返回这个块，页眉和页脚也相应地更新。
其他回答
malloc/free的一个实现如下所示:
通过sbrk() (Unix调用)从操作系统获取一块内存。 在该内存块周围创建一个页眉和页脚，并提供一些信息，如大小、权限以及下一个和上一个块的位置。 当传入对malloc的调用时，引用一个指向适当大小的块的列表。 然后返回这个块，页眉和页脚也相应地更新。
理论上，malloc为这个应用程序从操作系统获取内存。然而，由于您可能只需要4个字节，而操作系统需要在页面上工作(通常是4k)， malloc所做的要比这多一点。它取一个页面，并把它自己的信息放在那里，这样它就可以跟踪你从该页中分配和释放了什么。
例如，当分配4个字节时，malloc会提供一个指向4个字节的指针。您可能没有意识到的是，在4个字节之前的8-12个字节的内存被malloc用来构成您已分配的所有内存的链。当你调用free时，它会取你的指针，备份到它的数据所在的位置，并对其进行操作。
当你释放内存时，malloc将内存块从链上取下…并且可能会也可能不会将这些内存返回给操作系统。如果它这样做，那么访问内存可能会失败，因为操作系统将拿走你访问该位置的权限。如果malloc保留内存(因为它在该页中分配了其他内容，或者用于某些优化)，则访问将正常工作。这仍然是错误的，但可能会起作用。
免责声明:我所描述的是malloc的一种常见实现，但绝不是唯一可能的实现。
内存保护具有页面粒度，并且需要内核交互
你的示例代码本质上是在问为什么示例程序没有陷阱，答案是内存保护是一个内核特性，只应用于整个页面，而内存分配器是一个库特性，它管理。没有强制执行…任意大小的块，通常比页面小得多。
内存只能以页为单位从程序中删除，即使这样也不太可能被观察到。
如果需要，Calloc(3)和malloc(3)会与内核交互以获取内存。但是大多数free(3)的实现都不会将内存返回给内核1，它们只是将内存添加到一个空闲列表中，稍后calloc()和malloc()会参考这个列表，以便重用释放的块。
即使free()函数想要将内存返回给系统，它也需要至少一个连续的内存页才能让内核实际保护该区域，因此释放一个小块只会导致保护更改，如果它是页面中的最后一个小块。
So your block is there, sitting on the free list. You can almost always access it and nearby memory just as if it were still allocated. C compiles straight to machine code and without special debugging arrangements there are no sanity checks on loads and stores. Now, if you try and access a free block, the behavior is undefined by the standard in order to not make unreasonable demands on library implementators. If you try and access freed memory or meory outside an allocated block, there are various things that can go wrong:
Sometimes allocators maintain separate blocks of memory, sometimes they use a header they allocate just before or after (a "footer", I guess) your block, but they just might want to use memory within the block for the purpose of keeping the free list linked together. If so, your reading the block is OK, but its contents may change, and writing to the block would be likely to cause the allocator to misbehave or crash. Naturally, your block may be allocated in the future, and then it is likely to be overwritten by your code or a library routine, or with zeroes by calloc(). If the block is reallocated, it may also have its size changed, in which case yet more links or initialization will be written in various places. Obviously you may reference so far out of range that you cross a boundary of one of your program's kernel-known segments, and in this one case you will trap.
操作原理
So, working backwards from your example to the overall theory, malloc(3) gets memory from the kernel when it needs it, and typically in units of pages. These pages are divided or consolidated as the program requires. Malloc and free cooperate to maintain a directory. They coalesce adjacent free blocks when possible in order to be able to provide large blocks. The directory may or may not involve using the memory in freed blocks to form a linked list. (The alternative is a bit more shared-memory and paging-friendly, and it involves allocating memory specifically for the directory.) Malloc and free have little if any ability to enforce access to individual blocks even when special and optional debugging code is compiled into the program.
1. The fact that very few implementations of free() attempt to return memory to the system is not necessarily due to the implementors slacking off. Interacting with the kernel is much slower than simply executing library code, and the benefit would be small. Most programs have a steady-state or increasing memory footprint, so the time spent analyzing the heap looking for returnable memory would be completely wasted. Other reasons include the fact that internal fragmentation makes page-aligned blocks unlikely to exist, and it's likely that returning a block would fragment blocks to either side. Finally, the few programs that do return large amounts of memory are likely to bypass malloc() and simply allocate and free pages anyway.
Malloc和free依赖于实现。典型的实现包括将可用内存划分为“空闲列表”——可用内存块的链表。许多实现人为地将它分为小对象和大对象。空闲块以内存块有多大以及下一个内存块在哪里等信息开始。
当你malloc时，一个块从空闲列表中拉出来。当你释放时，块被放回空闲列表。很有可能，当你重写指针的末尾时，你是在写空闲列表中一个块的头。当您释放内存时，free()尝试查看下一个块，并可能最终击中导致总线错误的指针。
你的程序崩溃是因为它使用了不属于你的内存。它可能被其他人使用，也可能没有——如果你幸运的话，你崩溃了，如果没有，问题可能会隐藏很长一段时间，然后回来咬你一口。
就malloc/free实现而言——整本书都致力于这个主题。基本上，分配器会从操作系统中获得更大的内存块，并为你管理它们。分配器必须解决的一些问题是:
How to get new memory How to store it - ( list or other structure, multiple lists for memory chunks of different size, and so on ) What to do if the user requests more memory than currently available ( request more memory from OS, join some of the existing blocks, how to join them exactly, ... ) What to do when the user frees memory Debug allocators may give you bigger chunk that you requested and fill it some byte pattern, when you free the memory the allocator can check if wrote outside of the block ( which is probably happening in your case) ...
