[PATCH] Silence a new Valgrind warning

Started by Aleksander Alekseevabout 1 month ago5 messageshackers
Jump to latest
#1Aleksander Alekseev
aleksander@timescale.com

Hi,

Commit 4966bd3ed95e revealed a non-critical memory leak in
ProcessStartupPacket() which Valgrind is very much upset about:

```
63 (32 direct, 31 indirect) bytes in 1 blocks are definitely lost in
loss record 355 of 800
at 0x9D260C: palloc (mcxt.c:1411)
by 0x54B3D2: new_list (list.c:137)
by 0x54B8CC: lappend (list.c:344)
by 0x78B41A: ProcessStartupPacket (backend_startup.c:786)
by 0x78A411: BackendInitialize (backend_startup.c:295)
by 0x789F2F: BackendMain (backend_startup.c:110)
by 0x67EEED: postmaster_child_launch (launch_backend.c:268)
by 0x685D50: BackendStartup (postmaster.c:3606)
by 0x6830CF: ServerLoop (postmaster.c:1713)
by 0x682982: PostmasterMain (postmaster.c:1403)
by 0x547DFE: main (main.c:231)
```

The proposed patch silences the warnings.

--
Best regards,
Aleksander Alekseev

Attachments:

v1-0001-Free-memory-allocated-for-unrecognized_protocol_o.patchtext/x-patch; charset=US-ASCII; name=v1-0001-Free-memory-allocated-for-unrecognized_protocol_o.patchDownload+2-1
#2Heikki Linnakangas
heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com
In reply to: Aleksander Alekseev (#1)
Re: [PATCH] Silence a new Valgrind warning

On 12/03/2026 14:56, Aleksander Alekseev wrote:

Commit 4966bd3ed95e revealed a non-critical memory leak in
ProcessStartupPacket() which Valgrind is very much upset about:

```
63 (32 direct, 31 indirect) bytes in 1 blocks are definitely lost in
loss record 355 of 800
at 0x9D260C: palloc (mcxt.c:1411)
by 0x54B3D2: new_list (list.c:137)
by 0x54B8CC: lappend (list.c:344)
by 0x78B41A: ProcessStartupPacket (backend_startup.c:786)
by 0x78A411: BackendInitialize (backend_startup.c:295)
by 0x789F2F: BackendMain (backend_startup.c:110)
by 0x67EEED: postmaster_child_launch (launch_backend.c:268)
by 0x685D50: BackendStartup (postmaster.c:3606)
by 0x6830CF: ServerLoop (postmaster.c:1713)
by 0x682982: PostmasterMain (postmaster.c:1403)
by 0x547DFE: main (main.c:231)
```

The proposed patch silences the warnings.

I don't see that warning. What valgrind options did you use?

The patch looks good to me.

- Heikki

#3Aleksander Alekseev
aleksander@timescale.com
In reply to: Heikki Linnakangas (#2)
Re: [PATCH] Silence a new Valgrind warning

Hi Heikki,

I don't see that warning. What valgrind options did you use?

The patch looks good to me.

Here is the script I'm using:

https://github.com/afiskon/pgscripts/blob/master/valgrind-meson.sh

--
Best regards,
Aleksander Alekseev

In reply to: Heikki Linnakangas (#2)
Re: [PATCH] Silence a new Valgrind warning

On Fri, Mar 13, 2026 at 11:33 AM Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi> wrote:

The proposed patch silences the warnings.

I don't see that warning. What valgrind options did you use?

I have seen this one, though only when --leak-check=yes is passed to Valgrind.

--
Peter Geoghegan

#5Heikki Linnakangas
heikki.linnakangas@enterprisedb.com
In reply to: Peter Geoghegan (#4)
Re: [PATCH] Silence a new Valgrind warning

On 13/03/2026 19:33, Peter Geoghegan wrote:

On Fri, Mar 13, 2026 at 11:33 AM Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka@iki.fi> wrote:

The proposed patch silences the warnings.

I don't see that warning. What valgrind options did you use?

I have seen this one, though only when --leak-check=yes is passed to Valgrind.

Ok now I see it. Not sure what I was doing wrong earlier.

Pushed, thanks Aleksander!

- Heikki