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=-4.0 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,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 2199D1F852 for ; Fri, 14 Jan 2022 19:47:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S244179AbiANTra (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 Jan 2022 14:47:30 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp21.pobox.com ([173.228.157.53]:51817 "EHLO pb-smtp21.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S237098AbiANTra (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 Jan 2022 14:47:30 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp21.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp21.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EE880168A3D; Fri, 14 Jan 2022 14:47:29 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=N2qdYr3T94vPSpYrF/RyvrSQP4TMvrt0Z1EMy5 +6acU=; b=HDimVyWKJKAWlI5U2HmzUM87sAW3TZmnt8wL3UzjbpyCOsFPLfpUBU iXHpUh8I6GImb5J1UfSQqDLhgOOw5bQxKcGfza/QZZcmp3Z1E4YE08MB5TSUpSs/ 3funk4f354rbNM367F4XCuvvqAej/ZWsn6boSgOeOBXh4FPrnbCmk= Received: from pb-smtp21.sea.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp21.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E6CC3168A3A; Fri, 14 Jan 2022 14:47:29 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [104.133.2.91]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp21.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4FAA5168A39; Fri, 14 Jan 2022 14:47:27 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Elijah Newren , =?utf-8?B?w4Z2YXIgQXJuZmrDtnLDsA==?= Bjarmason Cc: Git Mailing List Subject: Re: What's cooking in git.git (Jan 2022, #03; Thu, 13) References: Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2022 11:47:26 -0800 In-Reply-To: (Elijah Newren's message of "Fri, 14 Jan 2022 08:27:54 -0800") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: CD574150-7572-11EC-901B-CBA7845BAAA9-77302942!pb-smtp21.pobox.com Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Elijah Newren writes: > It's apparently the latter, because there have been no test script > changes in the relevant tests. > >> Somebody with too much time on their hand should go in and check to >> help, before CI testing on 'seen' becomes useful again. > > This "fixes" seen: > https://lore.kernel.org/git/pull.1192.git.git.1642176433017.gitgitgadget@gmail.com/ > > I briefly looked at a couple leak traces and thought they looked ref > related, but I don't have time to go hunt down memory leaks right now. > I figure this thread has reported them, so let's just get "seen" back > to green. If it were "we added a use of known-to-leak command in an otherwise clean test, without adding a new leak", I would wholeheartedly support such a change, but if it is the other way around, it may make sense to leave it broken as an incentive for people who care about leaks to go in and fix them up. If we toggle it off any time leak-checker CI job starts complaining on a test script, the leak-checker CI job serves no useful purpose, no? An obvious alternative, based on the same attitude, is to rip out the whole fragile leak-checker thing from the CI. I've mentioned an ideal alternative (disregarding feasibility) already elsewhere so I won't repeat it. Thanks.