Re: Leak Sanitizer - how to suppress leaks

[David Holland <dholland-tech%netbsd.org@localhost>]

On Mon, Sep 16, 2019 at 07:47:24AM +0700, Robert Elz wrote:
 >   | There have been OSes in the past where memory not freed yet at process
 >   | exit is _not_ freed by the system, and there might be again,
 > 
 > Please everyone, let's retain some perspective.   Systems like those
 > (Roy mentioned RTEMS as an example) require specially constructed code,
 > as in a system where process termination doesn't free all the process's
 > resources, then what

The OS I was thinking of was a desktop OS that could (and did) run
quite a bit of unix code. As I recall the various C runtimes available
took some steps to avoid gaping memory leaks, but there's still no
reason to not tidy up when one can.

 > The one reason for doing this kind of free() is so that LSan type analysers
 > can look at memory and report anything that wasn't freed.

This is, however, itself a pretty good reason.

-- 
David A. Holland
dholland%netbsd.org@localhost