On Wed, Sep 08 2021, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
>> We can compile git with SANITIZE=leak, and have had various efforts in
>> the past such as 31f9acf9ce2 (Merge branch 'ah/plugleaks', 2021-08-04)
>> to plug memory leaks, but have had no CI testing of it to ensure that
>> we don't get regressions. This series adds a GIT_TEST_* mode for
>> checking those regressions, and runs it in CI.
>>
>> Since I submitted v2 the delta between origin/master..origin/seen
>> broke even t0001-init.sh when run under SANITIZE=leak, so this series
>> will cause test smoke on "seen".
>>
>> That failure is due to a bug in es/config-based-hooks [1] and the
>> hn/reftable topic, i.e. these patches are legitimately catching
>> regressions in "seen" from day 1.
>
> So is there a point in sending this out to the list, before sending
> fixes to these broken topic and making sure they get corrected?
>
> Because the CI does not "bisect" to tell us "ok, up to this point in
> 'seen', all the topics merged play well together", the overall
> effect in the bigger picture is that 'seen' with this series would
> cause CI to stay in failed state.
>
> For now, I'll keep this near the tip of 'seen'.
The breakages with it are in combination with:
ab/config-based-hooks-base
es/config-based-hooks
hn/reftable
You've got v4 of ab/config-based-hooks-base, the v5 is at [1], but we've
been waiting on emily to re-roll hers on top. As noted in that E-Mail
I've got a working re-roll of it as
avar-nasamuffin/config-based-hooks-restart-3 in my repo.
That'll leave hn/reftable, which given [2] I thought you were planning
to eject, and wiht the number of fixups for it / the planned re-doing of
it by Han-Wen[3] maybe it's better to do that now?
What do you think about that plan?
I.e. ejecting hn/reftable while waiting on a re-roll, and either
ejecting es/config-based-hooks while waiting, or I can submit the
avar-nasamuffin/config-based-hooks-restart-3 I've got pending Emily's
own re-roll (which may or may not be different from that).
That along with picking up the v5 of my ab/config-based-hooks-base
should make "seen" pass with SANITIZE=leak on these tests, unless
there's other just-introduced regressions. I tried re-building it a few
days ago, I haven't done that just now.
1. https://lore.kernel.org/git/cover-v5-00.36-00000000000-20210902T125110Z-avarab@xxxxxxxxx/
2. https://lore.kernel.org/git/xmqq4kaxe5dt.fsf@gitster.g/
3. https://lore.kernel.org/git/CAFQ2z_N8pUsp3cdBpybHBD-V9_1sARCZvSxr0UkMfcwCoQfCbw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/
