Hi Junio On 04/08/2022 19:08, Junio C Hamano wrote:
"Phillip Wood via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
Between USE_LIBC_MALLOC_DEBUG, which is the name Peff originally gave this intermediate variable, and the one you use here, I am undecided. If the only thing the GLIBC_TUNABLES mechanism can do were to tweak the malloc checking, then both names are good, but that is not the case. We are only seeing if we are going to use the malloc check feature given by glibc here, so the original name feels more to the point, and use of GLIBC_TUNABLE mechanism to trigger that malloc check feature is a mere implementation detail. But that is minor. Let's queue the patch to help me not to forget about it, and we'll amend it if necessary, as we'd probably need a helped-by or signed-off-by from Peff anyway before this hits 'next'.
Oh, sorry I'd missed that message where Peff posted essentially the same patch. I wrote this at the same time as 067109a5e7 ("tests: make SANITIZE=address imply TEST_NO_MALLOC_CHECK", 2022-04-09) but did not post in then as we were in a rc period and then forgot about it. Having just read Peff's message this does not make much difference to the test timings and if I'd seen that before I wouldn't have posted this.
As for the variable name I don't mind particularly either way, I chose this name as the variable is checking whether we should use the glibc tunables mechanism or not.
Best Wishes Phillip
Thanks.
