On 29-ene-2024 14:15:15, Junio C Hamano wrote:

Rubén Justo [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

This test is leak-free since it was added in e137fe3b29 (unit tests: add
TAP unit test framework, 2023-11-09)

Let's mark it as leak-free to make sure it stays that way (and to reduce
noise when looking for other leak-free scripts after we fix some leaks).

For other tests in this series, that rationale is a very sensible
thing, but does it apply to this one?

The point of the t-basic tests is to ensure the lightweight unit
test framework that requires nothing from Git behaves (and keeps
behaving) sensibly.  The point of running t[0-9][0-9][0-9][0-9]
tests under leak sanitizer is to exercise production Git code to
catch leaks in Git code.

So it is not quite clear if we even want to run this t0080 under
leak sanitizer to begin with.  t0080 is a relatively tiny test, but
do we even want to spend leak sanitizer cycles on it?  I dunno.

IIUC, that would imply building test-tool with a different set of flags
than Git, new artifacts ...  or running test-tool with some LSAN_OPTIONS
options, to disable it ...  or both ... or ...

And that is assuming that with test-tool we won't catch a leak in Git
that we're not seeing in the other tests ...

Maybe this is tangential to this series but,  while a decision is being
made, annotating the test makes GIT_TEST_PASSING_SANITIZE_LEAK=check
pass, which is the objective in this series. 

quoted

Signed-off-by: Rubén Justo <redacted>
---
 t/t0080-unit-test-output.sh | 1 +
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)

diff --git a/t/t0080-unit-test-output.sh b/t/t0080-unit-test-output.sh
index 961b54b06c..6657c114a3 100755
--- a/t/t0080-unit-test-output.sh
+++ b/t/t0080-unit-test-output.sh

@@ -2,6 +2,7 @@
 
 test_description='Test the output of the unit test framework'
 
+TEST_PASSES_SANITIZE_LEAK=true
 . ./test-lib.sh
 
 test_expect_success 'TAP output from unit tests' '