Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] read-cache: plug a few leaks
- From
Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com>
- Date
- Jun 8, 2013, 14:04 UTC
- Message-ID
- <CAMP44s3K=VtkeCoKqnU9To9YbfO7vph9MsMWtgLWw0n=cYyq5g@mail.gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <51B32FFD.5070302@lsrfire.ath.cx>
On Sat, Jun 8, 2013 at 8:22 AM, René Scharfe <rene.scharfe@lsrfire.ath.cx> wrote:
> Am 08.06.2013 14:15, schrieb Felipe Contreras:
Show 5 quoted lines
>> Why leave it out? If somebody makes the mistake of doing the above >> sequence, would you prefer that we leak? > > Leaking is better than silently cleaning up after a buggy caller because it > still allows the underlying bug to be found.
No, it doesn't. The pointer is replaced and forever lost. How is leaking memory helping anyone to find the bug?
-- Felipe Contreras