This bugzilla service is closed. All entries have been migrated to
Bug 1706 - SparseMatrix reallocation throws std::bad_alloc when StorageIndex > Eigen::Index
Summary: SparseMatrix reallocation throws std::bad_alloc when StorageIndex > Eigen::Index
Alias: None
Product: Eigen
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Sparse (show other bugs)
Version: 3.3 (current stable)
Hardware: All All
: Normal Internal Design
Assignee: Nobody
Depends on:
Blocks: 3.x
  Show dependency treegraph
Reported: 2019-05-06 13:30 UTC by Robin Deits
Modified: 2019-12-04 18:37 UTC (History)
3 users (show)


Description Robin Deits 2019-05-06 13:30:51 UTC
It appears that the internal resize methods for SparseMatrix spuriously throw std::bad_alloc when using a SparseMatrix whose StorageIndex is of a wider integer type than Eigen::Index. 

For example, consider the following snippet, in which we construct a SparseMatrix using 64-bit StorageIndex in a context where Eigen::Index is a 32-bit integer: 

#include <Eigen/Core>
#include <Eigen/Sparse>

int main() {
	Eigen::SparseMatrix<double, Eigen::ColMajor, int64_t> mat(5, 5);
	for (int i = 0; i < 5; i++) {
		for (int j = 0; j < 5; j++) {
			mat.coeffRef(i, j) = 1;
	return 0;

Compiling this with: 

g++ main.cpp -o main -Ieigen-3.3.7 -std=c++11

(assuming the Eigen sources live in `./eigen-3.3.7`) and running it with `./main` will abort with: 

terminate called after throwing an instance of 'std::bad_alloc'
  what():  std::bad_alloc
Aborted (core dumped)

The issue appears to stem from the following line in `SparseCore/CompressedStorage.h`:

Index realloc_size = (std::min<Index>)(NumTraits<StorageIndex>::highest(),  size + Index(reserveSizeFactor*double(size)));

when `StorageIndex` is wider than `Index`, this results in `realloc_size` being set to -1, which triggers the `internal::throw_std_bad_alloc()` on the next line.
Comment 1 Christoph Hertzberg 2019-05-06 14:05:24 UTC
This looks like an uncovered border case indeed. 
We could replace all `Index` by `size_t` or `ptrdiff_t` in the line you found. And additionally make sure (at compile-time) that StorageIndex is not larger that size_t, of course.
Comment 2 Christoph Hertzberg 2019-07-16 13:02:48 UTC
I'm actually tending to just disallow
  sizeof(StorageIndex) > sizeof(DenseIndex)

Using StorageIndex = int64_t is barely useful on 32bit systems, and setting DenseIndex to int32_t is barely useful on 64bit systems.
Comment 3 Nobody 2019-12-04 18:37:01 UTC
-- GitLab Migration Automatic Message --

This bug has been migrated to's GitLab instance and has been closed from further activity.

You can subscribe and participate further through the new bug through this link to our GitLab instance:

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.