Re: [Valgrind-users] Valgrind does leak detection across fork()

[Avery P. <ape...@ni...>]

On Mon, Dec 01, 2003 at 02:10:38PM +0000, Nicholas Nethercote wrote:

> On Sun, 30 Nov 2003, Avery Pennarun wrote:
> > In this particular case, I want to suppress scary-looking output (ie.
> > anything from valgrind) because it happens in the middle of my unit
> > tests, and scary-looking output from my unit tests should constitute a
> > bug, not a bonus valgrind feature :)
> 
> Are you using -q?  In that case, I think you do not want Valgrind to not
> leak-check fork() children, but to just be quieter, and only print a
> message if there is a genuine leak.  Is that right?

Hmm, I feel a bit silly that I didn't think of using -q.  Now I tried it,
and it still doesn't quite work the way I want: in fact, I don't think I
want "quietness" so much, because I like having the valgrind banner at the
top and bottom reminding me that I am, in fact, running valgrind.

I agree with you about the different kinds of memory leaks.  In this case, I
guess I *do* want to hear about "really lost" memory, but not about "still
accessible non-freed" memory... in the subprocess.  In the main process, I
want to hear about both, and it seems that using '-q' gets rid of the memory
final summary altogether, even if there are leaks.  (If I add
--leak-check=yes, then I get both the parent and subtasks' summaries.)

Hmm, I'm not sure what I want.  Maybe I want a summary even if -q is
enabled, but *only* if errors were detected.  And then a way to auto-enable
-q in a subtask but not in my main task?

Have fun,

Avery