| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Tristan Partin" <tristan(at)partin(dot)io> |
| Cc: | "pgsql-hackers" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Add malloc attribute to memory allocation functions |
| Date: | 2026-07-06 04:26:54 |
| Message-ID: | 924283.1783312014@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
"Tristan Partin" <tristan(at)partin(dot)io> writes:
> Given that we now have a tree that compiles fine against
> -Werror=mismatched-dealloc, we need to make sure that we don't regress.
> By adding the malloc attribute[0], we can protect against regressions,
> enable more accurate code coverage with -fanalyzer, and allow the
> compiler to do some optimizations.
I'm skeptical that this is going to lead to anything but grief.
In particular, since gcc has never heard of memory contexts,
I don't see how we are not going to get buried in bogus
-Wanalyzer-malloc-leak warnings. It doesn't really help
to add compiler annotations that only sort-of match our semantics.
(This opinion is based on years of dismissing useless Coverity
warnings of this kind.)
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Etsuro Fujita | 2026-07-06 04:36:08 | Re: postgres_fdw: fix cumulative stats after imported foreign-table stats |
| Previous Message | solai v | 2026-07-06 03:54:25 | Re: Add malloc attribute to memory allocation functions |