Re: [RFD PATCH 0/3] Free all the memory!

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: May 17, 2016, 18:16 UTC
Message-ID: <xmqqinycwnx2.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAGZ79kaJoAxqtsTuErQSgJiVeD_vdZ1MQXKr-LTtyro-FbscTQ@mail.gmail.com>

Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com> writes:

> So as a developer I wish we would close all leaks that are non-concerning.

Valgrind suppression (and if you use other tools, suppression for them) sounds like the way to go, I would think.

Reducing false positive is a good goal; it helps to highlight the real problems. But we need to find a way to do so without hurting the use by the end users by making them pay the unnecessary cost to free() at the end and by cluttering the code with #ifdefs that makes it easier to introduce subtle bugs.

Show 8 quoted lines

> David writes:
>> AFAIK, nothing in the "definitely lost" category is fixed by your rev-parse patch.
>>
>> I don't think we care that much about "still reachable" memory -- I only care about lost memory.  I could imagine, I guess, something that happens to save a pointer to a bunch of memory that should be freed, but I don't think that's the common case.
>
> As said above I'd want them to be fixed for me as a developer for
> better automated tooling and detection. (The alternative to fix the automated
> tooling is a no-no for me ;)

Does the word "no-no" mean what you seem to think it means? It sounds as if you are saying "fixing tools to reduce false positives is fundamentally wrong, I refuse to go in that direction".