From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS53758 23.128.96.0/24 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 79CB31F670 for ; Fri, 22 Oct 2021 04:45:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S231939AbhJVEln (ORCPT ); Fri, 22 Oct 2021 00:41:43 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:34810 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S231185AbhJVElm (ORCPT ); Fri, 22 Oct 2021 00:41:42 -0400 Received: from mail-io1-xd29.google.com (mail-io1-xd29.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::d29]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A6D7DC061764 for ; Thu, 21 Oct 2021 21:39:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-io1-xd29.google.com with SMTP id h196so3788144iof.2 for ; Thu, 21 Oct 2021 21:39:25 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ttaylorr-com.20210112.gappssmtp.com; s=20210112; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to; bh=gikce3NPlR1NeFK9iPdwndqEthCYORWX4yS2UeB3Ct0=; b=IjphJrsDlYiG37u1lhrhTyxDk9JpAtv3CtkvW5IHoVFJi9gHiTlBmxlrJ2mex+b1HX JcFhEFfuhe7kHHZQx2XdNVuUSyJl69/irCNgdTTjLK/2paRe1MkWjLNoAFLR1Ed/m3Hn jckF7MtAOjb354FYb5RbO3CdlrgY5/pnXRA50Dliz9+TDpeW2Ah0mtxrcE9p3CUm5J1z o01we9AXBg+zFnhDB9QUJLbgtYXs8U2eb4v+QrY8vNvS4hHkhgYqcGTf9uUs27GfmjQ2 1vNQSyoUWMxY2/SjoLui6ZaV+Unq5x9xthWQ6Rvr4COZsR5pEk2tbaBYjjYLGTmX4QeD 4bPQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:content-transfer-encoding :in-reply-to; bh=gikce3NPlR1NeFK9iPdwndqEthCYORWX4yS2UeB3Ct0=; b=FVoflT2xp0aRGnqQoEP9iP0UuPZzQ901rMONTYRUIyhzG9/WqS0GL+xaV9D7aAqzN5 zQZUBrbvC8c1vBK/zpS0JDPtZmhq6IdxpqfWzTH7HHitcdVHpcjP6ovdwPxawy1psgxR hekeXxPJJQPxGaHIAjtU+YeJHyDWjBaOxdx6UiH30i986qO//cWCzu7GhNVuJQFhqU9C I9uN/UDSUrUhxs+Khrz5H2NHL2Z4ltm5IfGl25/QEqQ/AAYHukp2EO37nPadG6+Nae6X h9a+ggtQfzklgVNtYRBrzeEB95lOHju9jIeRhu+pcGUUGI05BZpKeb/Dq/K1MCfwTsuj j3aQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530zPickQddW3qOZqnQpU93NW53S2D0FLqJjh6j/Gwe9ZsNtl0tf 9P/Xji8aGs31okKmwZfBO1n1Nw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwYZeGpYtHycaxuy+jyAM8XoznhpecmckjemLgHPmTeYv7vNtd3PQXjaVWA7uIqzI5Na1WfYg== X-Received: by 2002:a02:270c:: with SMTP id g12mr6736102jaa.75.1634877565072; Thu, 21 Oct 2021 21:39:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (104-178-186-189.lightspeed.milwwi.sbcglobal.net. [104.178.186.189]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id j22sm3391276ila.6.2021.10.21.21.39.24 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 21 Oct 2021 21:39:24 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2021 00:39:24 -0400 From: Taylor Blau To: =?utf-8?B?w4Z2YXIgQXJuZmrDtnLDsA==?= Bjarmason Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, dstolee@microsoft.com, peff@peff.net Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/11] midx: clean up t5319 under 'SANITIZE=leak' Message-ID: References: <211021.861r4emv7b.gmgdl@evledraar.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <211021.861r4emv7b.gmgdl@evledraar.gmail.com> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Oct 21, 2021 at 01:50:55PM +0200, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 20 2021, Taylor Blau wrote: > > > I tried to separate these out based on their respective areas. The last 10% are > > all from leaking memory in the rev_info structure, which I punted on for now by > > just UNLEAK()-ing it. That's all done in the last patch. If we choose to take > > that last patch, then t5319 passes even under SANITIZE=leak builds. But it's a > > little gross, so I'm happy to leave it out if others would prefer. > > I'll defer to you, but I've got a mild preference for keeping it out. An > upcoming series of patches I'm submitting (I'm waiting on the current > leak fixes to land) will fix most of those rev_info leaks. So not having > UNLEAK() markings in-flight makes things a bit easier to manage. If you don't mind, I think keeping this in (as a way to verify that we really did make t5319 leak-free) may be good for reviewers. When you clean these areas up, you'll have to remember to remove those UNLEAK()s, but hopefully they produce conflicts with your in-flight work that serve as not-too-annoying reminders. I would certainly rather not have to UNLEAK() those at all, so I am very excited to see a series from you which handles freeing these resources appropriately. It was just too big a bite for me to chew off when preparing this quick series. Thanks, Taylor