From: Stefan Sperling <stsp@stsp.name>
Subject: Re: last (?) round of memleaks
To: Omar Polo <op@omarpolo.com>
Cc: gameoftrees@openbsd.org
Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2022 12:24:17 +0200

On Tue, Sep 06, 2022 at 12:14:36PM +0200, Omar Polo wrote:
> I forgot one thing.  Valgrind now is mostly happy with gotwebd, it
> only complains about some strings allocated by yacc or config_* that
> are not free'd but I didn't bother trying to fix them because they're
> not real interesting leaks.
> 
> Valgrind however reports also this one that is interesting:
> 
> ==5901== 3,301 (864 direct, 2,437 indirect) bytes in 9 blocks are definitely lost in loss record 43 of 50
> ==5901==    at 0x48A6BEE: calloc (in /usr/libexec/valgrind/vgpreload_memcheck-amd64-linux.so)
> ==5901==    by 0x14C213: got_object_commit_alloc_partial (in /home/op/w/got-portable/gotwebd/gotwebd)
> ==5901==    by 0x15A0DD: get_commit_from_imsg (in /home/op/w/got-portable/gotwebd/gotwebd)
> ==5901==    by 0x15A574: got_privsep_recv_commit (in /home/op/w/got-portable/gotwebd/gotwebd)
> ==5901==    by 0x1440AE: request_packed_commit (in /home/op/w/got-portable/gotwebd/gotwebd)
> ==5901==    by 0x144124: read_packed_commit_privsep (in /home/op/w/got-portable/gotwebd/gotwebd)
> ==5901==    by 0x1444D7: open_commit (in /home/op/w/got-portable/gotwebd/gotwebd)
> ==5901==    by 0x1445F6: got_object_open_as_commit (in /home/op/w/got-portable/gotwebd/gotwebd)
> ==5901==    by 0x12760B: add_branch_tip (in /home/op/w/got-portable/gotwebd/gotwebd)
> ==5901==    by 0x14B943: got_object_idset_for_each (in /home/op/w/got-portable/gotwebd/gotwebd)
> ==5901==    by 0x127804: fetch_commits_from_open_branches (in /home/op/w/got-portable/gotwebd/gotwebd)
> ==5901==    by 0x127C7F: got_commit_graph_iter_next (in /home/op/w/got-portable/gotwebd/gotwebd)
> 
> and suggests that we're no free'ing the memory for the objects opened
> in add_branch_tip in the commit_graph.c; by reading the code however i
> don't see how it happens.

Hmm. I cannot spot this, either.