Re: Is SANITIZE=leak make test unreliable for anyone else?

> On Tue, Oct 03, 2023 at 08:33:26PM -0500, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>
>> My big question is:
>> 
>>     Do other people see random test failures when SANITIZE=leak is enabled?
>> 
>> Is it just me?
>
> Yes, I've seen this. You mentioned that you were testing with v2.42,
> which lacks 370ef7e40d (test-lib: ignore uninteresting LSan output,
> 2023-08-28). Try using the current version of 'master', or just
> cherry-picking that commit onto v2.42.
>
> A few other tips to avoid confusing results (though they at least do not
> vary from run to run):
>
>   - use the LEAK_LOG option, since you otherwise miss some cases (it
>     looks like you already are from what you posted above)
>
>   - gcc and clang sometimes produce different results. Right now I get
>     no leak from gcc on t9004, but clang reports one (I think clang is
>     right here)
>
>   - turn off compiler optimizations; we've had cases where code
>     reordering/removal creates false positives. Oh, hmm, I forgot we do
>     this by default since d3775de074 (Makefile: force -O0 when compiling
>     with SANITIZE=leak, 2022-10-18), so your v2.42 should be covered.

> make -C t/ all
> make[1]: Entering directory '/home/user/projects/git/git/t'
> rm -f -r 'test-results'
> GIT_TEST_EXT_CHAIN_LINT=0 && export GIT_TEST_EXT_CHAIN_LINT && make aggregate-results-and-cleanup
> make[2]: Entering directory '/home/user/projects/git/git/t'
> *** t0000-basic.sh ***
> Segmentation fault
> error: test_bool_env requires bool values both for $GIT_TEST_PASSING_SANITIZE_LEAK and for the default fallback