[cfe-dev] leaks in clang (many!)

[Kostya Serebryany]

Manuel mentions that clang has some intentional leaks.
That's right, and we handle them using BuryPointer
(./lib/Frontend/CompilerInvocation.cpp).
So if there are more *intentional* leaks we need to bury them too to let
LSan find the interesting ones.

--kcc


On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 4:25 PM, Kostya Serebryany <kcc at google.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> TL;DR: there are tons of leaks in Clang, please help us fix them.
>
> We have a build bot<http://lab.llvm.org:8011/builders/sanitizer-x86_64-linux-bootstrap> that
> runs clang bootstrap under AddressSanitizer<http://clang.llvm.org/docs/AddressSanitizer.html>
>  (ASan).
> LeakSanitizer <http://clang.llvm.org/docs/LeakSanitizer.html> (LSan, a
> leak detector that runs as part of ASan) is enabled on that bot,
> but as we've learned today only on part of the bootstrap actually runs
> LSan.
> LSan is enabled by the env. var ASAN_OPTIONS=detect_leaks=1 and we have
> this env. var. set on the bot so the 3-rd stage build uses it.
> However the lit runner clears the environment and the lit
> tests were not running under lsan until today, when I tried to enable lsan
> by default.
>
> This has discovered tons of leaks and I reverted the change.
> The leaks happen in various modes that are not exercised during regular
> self-compilation on linux,
> e.g. static analyzer, -emit-llvm, Windows ABI, etc.
> I've filed a few bugs (19520 19522 19523 19524) but there are dozens more
> reports left.
>
> If you care about leaks in clang, please check
> http://llvm.org/bugs/attachment.cgi?id=12423
> and see if any of these leaks are in your code.
>
> Thanks,
>
> --kcc
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/cfe-dev/attachments/20140423/09e017fa/attachment.html>