On (03/12/14 18:27), Nikolai Kondrashov wrote:
On 12/03/2014 06:19 PM, Nikolai Kondrashov wrote:
>Hi everyone,
>
>The attached patch removes Valgrind leak checking as suggested by Lukas on
>private sssd-ci list:
>
> Valgrind will ***NEVER*** find memory leaks in sssd. We use talloc for memory
> allocations and maintaining suppresion database is nightmare from my POV.
>
> I vote for removing testing memory leaks with valgrind
>
>Personally, I'm not sure if leak checking is completely useless, but perhaps
>it is. Has anyone caught any leaks with this so far?
>
>Regarding maintenance, we haven't had to add any new leak suppressions in more
>than two months, so it doesn't look so bad so far.
>
>However, if we feel this is irritating and/or useless, we should remove it.
>
>Does anyone have an opinion on this?
Oh, and Jakub has said this in response to Lukas:
We should keep the valgrind tests for checking for unallocated access or
use-after free.
Checking for leaks would only make sense if we compiled our external
libraries (like the idmap library) with malloc instead of talloc.
My opinion is clean. Jakub would like to have checking memory leaks
with valgrind. We need to find a compromise.
Therefore NACK.
BTW.
a) This is a reason why maintaining suppression database in git tree is the
worst solution. (it would be even worse with clang static analyser)
b) Our CI should be more flexible. Currently we need to wait until solution
will be pushed to the upstream. Meanwhile, CI is unusable.
There should be simple way how to override settings for specific plaform
or temporary disable test and do not touch referential implementation it git
tree. The problem should be fixed immediately (in ideal situation).
It didn't happen with libselinux valgrind problem. As a result of this new
issues were introduced. If there was a way how to temporary disable valgrind
test on older platforms we would faster find issue with old kerberos function
on rhel6 and problems with libpopt.
LS