From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from fout7-smtp.messagingengine.com (fout7-smtp.messagingengine.com [103.168.172.150]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8ECDB17BC9 for ; Mon, 22 Jul 2024 09:02:32 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=103.168.172.150 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1721638955; cv=none; b=G7BN35uCGCi+3Nt8JPKWM1h09sn8HUv2DJMjvVeBF7hRdE8RpAT05lxmfftza/79+7GqIWTYjmJ5MWLOjMul286ZJ9bYM350kd0LZssrT/v0pGyBRfFA8rKXblQsTBbsmZUKVe4NmP/6tsVuVx8Qr8dUeRSqQSgxH/zov8Vi66o= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1721638955; c=relaxed/simple; bh=jOIxsZ8tvXi30VDBaqeR07e5G37a5KCxSD8xdK4vqqc=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=Yn04k0yJZFcM4l6YeDcTBvZyU5D1RqNO9FyU86rGwtFbKtM4tnKy07kID+YBnlObMWdWQp0hIVqmpRKfWnGvQ75Gx7+gEo8rVN6qSBBAX1iC63c1cp9S8g724azHYMIZ9kbT7to1Mk8pjfLyslN5ajGDdbGpAaG4mJ0qDyfZpyY= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=pks.im; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pks.im; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=pks.im header.i=@pks.im header.b=MjGXhxbl; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b=PjSh2/JC; arc=none smtp.client-ip=103.168.172.150 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=pks.im Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pks.im Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=pks.im header.i=@pks.im header.b="MjGXhxbl"; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b="PjSh2/JC" Received: from compute5.internal (compute5.nyi.internal [10.202.2.45]) by mailfout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id EA5021380071; Mon, 22 Jul 2024 05:02:30 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute5.internal (MEProxy); Mon, 22 Jul 2024 05:02:30 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=pks.im; h=cc:cc :content-type:content-type:date:date:from:from:in-reply-to :in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:subject :subject:to:to; s=fm3; t=1721638950; x=1721725350; bh=jOIxsZ8tvX i30VDBaqeR07e5G37a5KCxSD8xdK4vqqc=; b=MjGXhxbltWwhi4FYugMgq1DUjK hjph217ZmGSDv4wqybOlm1sGcidCX2mIWNvRlp/o4KAc//JuaZ4BTR7HUEawhBbu miaMarFL7uUDN2GuFN8ZRh9sD7teVUGtURK+DiYKPdyHn1Wem2iouUy4d6XGsB8n vREhH+FYEAXQIh32P47eNvCiy6mEPepoYK7mr58UhBpJZFgfgw7WQiNM/XUPj4st CnaLzwncBSxU9camaYiJ7ZQlPHbH/8uPyCs6AKaEEU6P6pK3wf/JF+pA1jpVLs03 rkdM2BCSfzSclMBmgWu7FmIA55Af0UZRqvz0knGiBPw0vWDHNx0usavoFIeg== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-type:content-type:date:date :feedback-id:feedback-id:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:subject:subject:to :to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s= fm3; t=1721638950; x=1721725350; bh=jOIxsZ8tvXi30VDBaqeR07e5G37a 5KCxSD8xdK4vqqc=; b=PjSh2/JCUIJth2sNGBTqQISicfx9BGaaT0FT9MON6viy TiZQIj6mSdkWp4sBOis+4RKLYQuJI/JV5jCVhswUJi9tG/Yb5cGu8A57U2Iu9o51 3lcGLEPuRxb4WN8hRRrk4bIjeFUnNtGm+74P9jQe1kEMnwvAcyzeSbGQBZg5Hj0O zSNlBSqydjjUa8nzrNmzZgugLXuFhyu5Rak5x6s6lKDx8GVeVs4O0X5a/Av5GYUE jKJ0ZNdiJgzLVtwsgdBLkJTYJ5bVV93C23ijbt/GBe28ZhWMBaJsuc3WVZHFIIAP E+M3dmOGgEUGAuF59BmxHlbiHOvJvCrfaMtfz4vifQ== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeeftddrheejgddutdcutefuodetggdotefrodftvf curfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecu uegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenuc fjughrpeffhffvvefukfhfgggtuggjsehgtderredttdejnecuhfhrohhmpefrrghtrhhi tghkucfuthgvihhnhhgrrhguthcuoehpshesphhkshdrihhmqeenucggtffrrghtthgvrh hnpeetueevhffhudefvdegieeuieelgedthfegfedtueevjeejtdfgjeehudejuedtuden ucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehpshesph hkshdrihhm X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: i197146af:Fastmail Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Mon, 22 Jul 2024 05:02:29 -0400 (EDT) Received: by localhost (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTPSA id fe0febf5 (TLSv1.3:TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256:NO); Mon, 22 Jul 2024 09:01:15 +0000 (UTC) Date: Mon, 22 Jul 2024 11:02:24 +0200 From: Patrick Steinhardt To: Jeff King Cc: =?utf-8?B?UnViw6lu?= Justo , Git List Subject: Re: [PATCH] t0613: mark as leak-free Message-ID: References: <23d41343-54fd-46c6-9d78-369e8009fa0b@gmail.com> <20240701035759.GF610406@coredump.intra.peff.net> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="sozoOBhy4hoHZqNj" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20240701035759.GF610406@coredump.intra.peff.net> --sozoOBhy4hoHZqNj Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sun, Jun 30, 2024 at 11:57:59PM -0400, Jeff King wrote: > On Sun, Jun 30, 2024 at 08:46:38AM +0200, Rub=C3=A9n Justo wrote: >=20 > > We can mark t0613 as leak-free: > > [...] > > I'm not sure why this simple change has fallen through the cracks. > > Therefore, it's possible that I'm missing something. > >=20 > > I'd appreciate if someone could double-check. >=20 > I'd noticed it, too, while doing recent leak fixes. But since Patrick > has been working on leaks and is the go-to person for reftables, I > assumed he had already seen it and there was something clever going on. ;) Nah, you assumed too much :) I just forgot to mark this as leak-free and the topic crossed with my memory-leak-fix topics, so I didn't yet find the time to fix it. It does highlight an issue though: I think memory leak checks should be opt-out rather than opt-in by now. Most of our tests run just fine with the memory leak checker enabled, and that's also where we want to be headed. So making tests opt-out would likely raise more eyebrows when new tests are being added that explicitly opt out. The only reason I didn't send a patch like this yet is that it would of course create quite a bit of churn in our tests. I'm not sure whether that churn is really worth it, or whether we should instead just continue fixing tests until we can get rid of this marking altogether because all of our tests pass. Patrick --sozoOBhy4hoHZqNj Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAABCgAdFiEEF9hrgiFbCdvenl/rVbJhu7ckPpQFAmaeIB8ACgkQVbJhu7ck PpSnJBAAnqGJf3oHx2bLy5T2hlJnihV5SrV+NlUpuUehXyJDbr7uktOsbezFr+gR 5qTPWs5zBm+fd7YoRGs5VqHA7DxRPxPQi4WALqO/xyxiM2J2vDI8Y7ala5Odxqms FmrD9Du3Ga6OqKbAZU5jGojcDy1UBs8JNstXmoVe7Pe5KrmF7YnH2CCgqlqOt3it ak6v47uaro8YOJuwI1TzD19eFYF37JnbQR0aAt+9O/57iR/kjDHt0p4txzxinhwd MzW6vJ1q0j90Te+uq5L8bPPyeFz7k4o3H/N1IZE1a7IdQTmcCeKd5idDCyPLcpO4 nI5MwgQbuehrcEeWZMTmTDYvrvmdQtRU7+EpQKV4/cnP4fFUVOwX234LwbhQa8zZ bnZLzVNcq71u7PTwJaTBKtJyhH56kX74kLvSrXr/JrS02x73n4o9ZQEuhSlq77kv jWlW4//fM1FLHBEQeyFsxqPTFpGRPFnt88xktjaAA9KHnBDFWKgpEo7FGyZ46OOy jCGRHlVWoEhxgr/TfAjRLP1AnJ153JieqE/o0V5hbr05V4nG91TT6chZ0b9f0MRU 5tbLMQy5AuEI8tQr6Z9A2tRpgWpFQ2clY6GeO2Leon7qveUgomVBXW48zJFQKW7R k3tBlGMnh1qkpvrP+Fm3hxCspzaCETVWpkTIWWWwZssGMwqxqRA= =wjpA -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --sozoOBhy4hoHZqNj--