Re: [PATCH 0/2] Squash leaks in t0000

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



"Andrzej Hunt via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@xxxxxxxxx> writes:

> Carlo points out that t0000 currently doesn't pass with leak-checking
> enabled in:
> https://public-inbox.org/git/CAPUEsphMUNYRACmK-nksotP1RrMn09mNGFdEHLLuNEWH4AcU7Q@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/T/#m7e40220195d98aee4be7e8593d30094b88a6ee71
>
> Here's a series that I've sat on for a while, which adds some UNLEAK's to
> "fix" this situation - see the individual patches for a justification of why
> an UNLEAK seems appropriate.

It seems that discussion on 1/2 seemed to be heading in an
improvement but has petered out?  

I think the simplest fix in these two patches are worth taking, even
if we plan to further improve either by refining the granularity of
UNLEAK application or by introducing repo_clear_revisions() as Carlo
mentions (which is a preferred way to do this if we can manage it),
on top.

Thanks.



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]

  Powered by Linux