2008/7/2 Dan Kegel dank@kegel.com:
Zachary Goldberg wrote:
Also, Dan Kegel has been extraordinarily diligent in valgrinding of late (/applause) and I just wanted to ask if we're doing anything to support him?
A few people are starting to run Valgrind themselves. How about this: if you ever post a patch that causes a valgrind warning, you send yourself to valgrind jail for a month, and valgrind every patch you write before you send it in...
While I find Valgrind a very useful tool, not all of us are on platforms that Valgrind supports. However, I'm happy to receive emails about new Valgrind warnings from either Dan himself or from an automated tool directed to a mailing list.
perhaps making Valgrind-passing a requirement (along with not breaking tests) for being committed. I think perhaps we should take a look at this and seriously consider implementing it.
As a first step, James and I could (along with posting the errors to wine-devel) also post patches to revert the guilty changes. (And if we do it quickly enough, perhaps Alexandre can do the revert on the same day...) Then the author could fix and resubmit. How's that sound?
Some Valgrind warnings are already present in base code and are only triggered by new code or new tests. Reverting these type of patches would be wrong IMHO, although every effort should be made to correct the warning.