From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A952DC433E0 for ; Fri, 12 Mar 2021 23:43:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7982364F86 for ; Fri, 12 Mar 2021 23:43:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S235861AbhCLXnD (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 Mar 2021 18:43:03 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com ([64.147.108.71]:51741 "EHLO pb-smtp2.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S235848AbhCLXm5 (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 Mar 2021 18:42:57 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 25A10BF1DC; Fri, 12 Mar 2021 18:42:57 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=Y1ihM4/liHffE0vevbWTUluJwco=; b=JE0cqH E/naxgQGzMCtUOWI6XQslorKeAUi3Z1RIWAKesUo+S8rwS9CLvIB9zu6Xf4/lSsT A7S+L2BsaSjMECRsq1gz9mb5zK0TGUMTiSRKzgXcHk89iwDhifGoWRJxSH85fShZ fXQ3PYcdThNXKREb5XTgaJAupUx3s9+nmRqeA= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=Gj0PO5pLIOSlDMIotDjDX6uftAoKwysd 1y68X/DiJ8Sg2QXwoPrJCstHFdld84sFj66GdMI/12Zzt0uC/l/L0ZRLQfw0RoOC ij4rKtfO8r1JwW6od3d1x0S0502gN/GGL8cm1eafuTZFUpEN2+CkH9LVZ1N7Lz8g SsvRvD3o5ks= Received: from pb-smtp2.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E661BF1DB; Fri, 12 Mar 2021 18:42:57 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [34.74.119.39]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A2449BF1DA; Fri, 12 Mar 2021 18:42:56 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Andrzej Hunt via GitGitGadget , Jeff King Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Andrzej Hunt Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/7] Fix all leaks in t0001 References: Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2021 15:42:56 -0800 In-Reply-To: (Jeff King's message of "Mon, 8 Mar 2021 13:55:22 -0500") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.1.90 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: ABDA5342-838C-11EB-85A1-74DE23BA3BAF-77302942!pb-smtp2.pobox.com Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Jeff King writes: > I think it's worth doing. The reason t0000 passes is because it was my > reference script when adding UNLEAK() back in: > > https://lore.kernel.org/git/20170905130149.agc3zp3s6i6e5aki@sigill.intra.peff.net/ > > (which might be of historical interest if you haven't read it). I knew > that the next step would be tediously going through the test suite > looking at the tool results, and I somehow stalled on that part. ;) > ... > I haven't looked at the individual patches yet. I'll respond to them > individually. Thanks for working on this, and reviewing the result. I agree with Peff's review comments and will look forward to seeing a new iteration that updates the issues pointed out, which range from coding styles to constness---IIUC, none of them were rocket science to correct.