Ok. Please use the patch that you have already queued in the ep integration branch. Thank you 2012/9/17, Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx>: > Elia Pinto <gitter.spiros@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > >>> - That "165" thing I mentioned earlier. >> >> Thank you so much for the comments, that's fine. A single >> consideration for MALLOC_PERTURB. >> >> You can use any value between 1..255 for MALLOC_PERTURB_ >> That chooses the byte that glibc will use to memset all freed buffers. >> In general it is defined as >> >> export MALLOC_PERTURB_=$(($RANDOM % 255 + 1)) >> >> (as drepper pointed out http://udrepper.livejournal.com/11429.html) > > Drepper never recommends RANDOM there. > >> Using a random value is slightly better than using a fixed one >> in case your fixed value is someday just the right/wrong value to mask >> a problem. > > Quite the contrary. When you use a fixed pattern, it is easy which > other pieces of memory has uninitailized contents. When you use a > random value, you sometimes get an error and sometimes the test > mysteriously pass, which does not help debugging. > > openSUSE folks seem to use a fixed value for this exact reason of > repeatability of tests. > > http://jaegerandi.blogspot.com/2012/01/finding-subtile-malloc-bugs.html > >> So OK per the original expression? > > No. > > I am not convinced 165 is the perfect value, but I am fairly certain > any fixed value is better than using a random to deliberately worsen > repeatability of the tests. > -- Inviato dal mio dispositivo mobile -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html