From: "Rubén Justo" <rjusto@gmail.com>
To: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Cc: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>,
Git List <git@vger.kernel.org>,
Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] test-lib: fix GIT_TEST_SANITIZE_LEAK_LOG
Date: Sat, 6 Jul 2024 13:20:36 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <75a635b9-7622-42f7-b202-6991775e75f0@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20240706061850.GB700645@coredump.intra.peff.net>
On Sat, Jul 06, 2024 at 02:18:50AM -0400, Jeff King wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 03, 2024 at 11:44:33PM +0200, Rubén Justo wrote:
>
> > > Explicitly indicating that the error is being forced due to
> > > "GIT_TEST_SANITIZE_LEAK_LOG=true", for a test that doesn't fail when run
> > > normally or even when run with just
> > > "GIT_TEST_PASSING_SANITIZE_LEAK=yes", could save us some confusion.
> > >
> > > So, I dunno.
> > >
> > > Anyway, I agree that this can be addressed later.
> > >
> > > Thanks.
> >
> > Maybe what we should do is integrate "GIT_TEST_SANITIZE_LEAK_LOG" into
> > "GIT_TEST_PASSING_SANITIZE_LEAK" because I'm not sure what value we get
> > by keeping them separate (test performance?). But that's another topic,
> > even further out of scope of this patch :-)
>
> I don't think we want to integrate them, but I'd suggest that
> SANITIZE_LEAK_LOG should be the default/only option.
>
> Without it, you are potentially missing leaks in programs whose failing
> exit codes do not trigger a test failure. So there is no point in
> running PASSING_SANITIZE_LEAK=check without also checking the logs. But
> it is still useful to set SANITIZE_LEAK_LOG just for normal runs to look
> for leaks.
>
> I don't know of any reason we couldn't always check the logs (for a
> leak-checking build), and I didn't see anything in the history. I think
> it was written that way only because there is otherwise no affirmative
> action by the user to say "and btw, look for leaks" (and if we are not
> looking for leaks, there might not be any logs!).
>
> But really, if you have done a leak-checking build, then every run of
> the tests is looking for leaks, whether you check the logs or not. So we
> should able to just check that $SANITIZE_LEAK is set.
> And then there would be one less thing for people checking for leaks
> to remember to set.
I completely agree.
Let's wait for the dust to settle after the fix in this series, and then
I'll address the change as you described.
Thanks.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-07-06 11:20 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-06-30 6:42 [PATCH] test-lib: fix GIT_TEST_SANITIZE_LEAK_LOG Rubén Justo
2024-07-01 3:49 ` Jeff King
2024-07-01 19:29 ` Junio C Hamano
2024-07-01 20:19 ` Junio C Hamano
2024-07-03 21:35 ` Rubén Justo
2024-07-03 21:44 ` Rubén Justo
2024-07-06 6:18 ` Jeff King
2024-07-06 11:20 ` Rubén Justo [this message]
2024-07-06 23:13 ` Jeff King
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=75a635b9-7622-42f7-b202-6991775e75f0@gmail.com \
--to=rjusto@gmail.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=peff@peff.net \
--cc=sunshine@sunshineco.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).