From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <godmar@gmail.com>
Received: from mail-pj1-x1032.google.com (mail-pj1-x1032.google.com
 [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::1032])
 by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 797FD386103A
 for <libc-help@sourceware.org>; Wed, 17 Mar 2021 20:47:43 +0000 (GMT)
DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 sourceware.org 797FD386103A
Received: by mail-pj1-x1032.google.com with SMTP id
 ot17-20020a17090b3b51b0290109c9ac3c34so1599805pjb.4
 for <libc-help@sourceware.org>; Wed, 17 Mar 2021 13:47:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
 d=1e100.net; s=20161025;
 h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date
 :message-id:subject:to:cc;
 bh=fkJP1kGInekDxIYcx2fhWFwp7P92iQ+CcTbYNEAWido=;
 b=QIuVPP4259GilpAixgbIyeAA0FsCndiHv0jtqiBfuEJP+G0YovxrspdVgJqaZLhrfY
 NEFvEd1bwPzJEQWdKLehRih25kNOTQulL++R9g16DffzaXzep7aTZHy3X+kOMXJLCCCr
 +xhnqxiojZN/S8z2rMGjDx/LfRU1kxwybBXG51v5zxOz+wj7RCdLvvJj4R1M0q99xaN+
 F1zXk/XXvVyf19vzdzUssJ+cZaUbuYwXE7NtWB+8EeCk6vGnTp7FWfqBSPm8aHBQ391f
 EVIhxmxEQ+vHagfMrDSP6zYJFc2vn1vzNXxIQcR4w4dhN2fjnhuks5CXLf0R1K78Tcf+
 74UA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533WpQDOMmXg4hiltQNC6bj1vkxYkd5abcsG7jDqCA27L8RWU0LM
 qukC5xr4nZILUaIY+KIlFLzIN3EH1tzWamIfi57QLcqPWRU=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJz8vL/OC2KHiBJfh2rgB4NKtHAhSjEg4wL/3+3XTA+cGvmX00VSLgIIHdfp9iOx3iVGypvK0J9ymSkm+5ZLqxM=
X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:7e4a:b029:e5:d1cf:27e4 with SMTP id
 a10-20020a1709027e4ab02900e5d1cf27e4mr6097630pln.69.1616014062614; Wed, 17
 Mar 2021 13:47:42 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <s2tebb$135j$1@ciao.gmane.io>
 <87h7l91xnu.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <87h7l91xnu.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com>
From: Godmar Back <godmar@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2021 16:47:31 -0400
Message-ID: <CAB4+JY+JKtkHwernq6OPf7arRzA_XGDfG37hzvzS8=P-0N8fzQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Bug or not? printf allocates buffer & never frees it
To: Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com>
Cc: Ian Pilcher via Libc-help <libc-help@sourceware.org>,
 Ian Pilcher <arequipeno@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIM_SIGNED,
 DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, DKIM_VALID_EF, FREEMAIL_FROM, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,
 SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS, TXREP autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on
 server2.sourceware.org
X-BeenThere: libc-help@sourceware.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Libc-help mailing list <libc-help.sourceware.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://sourceware.org/mailman/options/libc-help>,
 <mailto:libc-help-request@sourceware.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://sourceware.org/pipermail/libc-help/>
List-Help: <mailto:libc-help-request@sourceware.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://sourceware.org/mailman/listinfo/libc-help>,
 <mailto:libc-help-request@sourceware.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2021 20:47:44 -0000

On Wed, Mar 17, 2021 at 1:46 PM Florian Weimer via Libc-help
<libc-help@sourceware.org> wrote:
>
> What happens if you remove the muntrace call?  I suspect you see this
> leak because you are specifically telling glibc not to log the
> deallocation.
>

Since you called this a `leak`, may I ask a question that is
tangentially related?

Is GNU libc designed to be used in environments that do not deallocate
all memory upon exit(), i.e., environments that can call exit()
multiple times without being provided with a fresh heap each time?  I
understand ISO C allows this and POSIX is quiet on this specific
issue. Is complete deallocation of one-time buffers before exit() a
design goal of GNU libc?

 - Godmar