Re: BUG #15943: Valgrind-detected error in SlruPhysicalWritePage
| От | Andres Freund |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: BUG #15943: Valgrind-detected error in SlruPhysicalWritePage |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | BE3C7FA7-37CB-4058-BED1-EFFEA6E6249D@anarazel.de обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: BUG #15943: Valgrind-detected error in SlruPhysicalWritePage (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
| Список | pgsql-bugs |
Hi, On August 8, 2019 2:41:42 PM EDT, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >Andres Freund <andres@anarazel.de> writes: >> Seems there's no reason to not zero initialize memory here? But >perhaps just by initializing the stack variable? > >I think all we need here is another suppression in >src/tools/valgrind.supp. We have not insisted on zeroing >pad bytes that get sent to disk in the places already >enumerated in valgrind.supp, so why would we apply a >different rule to async.c? Well, with a lot of the other case there's a lot of sources for such uninitialized data. Here there probably is just one?If it weren't such a game of whack a mole, I'd even consider properly initializing the other places. And initializingthe stack data here ought to be cheap in this case? Andres -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
В списке pgsql-bugs по дате отправления: