From: Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im>
To: "Rubén Justo" <rjusto@gmail.com>
Cc: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>, Git List <git@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Re* [PATCH] t0613: mark as leak-free
Date: Wed, 24 Jul 2024 07:16:00 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZqCOEGfTdOSAL60w@tanuki> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4b1391d5-89c2-41b1-b1de-e1bd26b9f10e@gmail.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1891 bytes --]
On Wed, Jul 24, 2024 at 01:07:23AM +0200, Rubén Justo wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 23, 2024 at 05:03:39PM -0400, Jeff King wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 22, 2024 at 11:02:24AM +0200, Patrick Steinhardt wrote:
> > So I dunno. If we think people are paying attention to CI on their
> > topics, and we think that we are close enough to leak-free that (1b)
> > won't come up a lot, it might make sense. I'm not quite sure we're there
> > yet on the latter, but it's mostly gut feeling (and I know things have
> > gotten a bit better recently, too).
>
> I don't know either. Maybe it seems a bit early still considering the
> numbers we have:
>
> $ git grep -l PASSES_SANITIZE_LEAK=true t/t[0-9][0-9][0-9][0-9]-*.sh | wc -l
> 678
> $ git grep -L PASSES_SANITIZE_LEAK=true t/t[0-9][0-9][0-9][0-9]-*.sh | wc -l
> 329
These numbers aren't quite right -- you have to filter out most of the
tests that include "lib-git-svn.sh", which reverses the schema and makes
leak checks opt-out (?!). That brings me to the following hacky numbers:
$ grep -l TEST_PASSES_SANITIZE_LEAK=true t[0-9][0-9][0-9][0-9]-*.sh | grep -v svn | wc -l
678
$ grep -L TEST_PASSES_SANITIZE_LEAK=true t[0-9][0-9][0-9][0-9]-*.sh | grep -v svn | wc -l
261
I've got two local topic branches pending that reduce the number of
failing tests even further. One is the Perforce series I've sent out
yesterday. And then another random set of leak fixes. Which together
bring us to:
$ grep -l TEST_PASSES_SANITIZE_LEAK=true t[0-9][0-9][0-9][0-9]-*.sh | grep -v svn | wc -l
749
$ grep -L TEST_PASSES_SANITIZE_LEAK=true t[0-9][0-9][0-9][0-9]-*.sh | grep -v svn | wc -l
190
So considering that it's currently still rather easy to make progress,
I'd vote for keeping things as-is and wait for another couple of series
to land before switching to opt-out.
Patrick
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-07-24 5:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-06-30 6:46 [PATCH] t0613: mark as leak-free Rubén Justo
2024-07-01 3:57 ` Jeff King
2024-07-01 19:35 ` Rubén Justo
2024-07-01 19:38 ` t0612: " Rubén Justo
2024-07-01 19:40 ` Eric Sunshine
2024-07-01 19:44 ` [PATCH] " Rubén Justo
2024-07-22 9:02 ` [PATCH] t0613: " Patrick Steinhardt
2024-07-23 21:03 ` Jeff King
2024-07-23 23:07 ` Re* " Rubén Justo
2024-07-24 5:16 ` Patrick Steinhardt [this message]
2024-07-24 6:45 ` Rubén Justo
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=ZqCOEGfTdOSAL60w@tanuki \
--to=ps@pks.im \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=peff@peff.net \
--cc=rjusto@gmail.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).