public inbox for [email protected]  

help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Bertrand Drouvot <[email protected]>
To: Alexander Kuzmenkov <[email protected]>
Cc: Heikki Linnakangas <[email protected]>
Cc: Andres Freund <[email protected]>
Cc: Anthonin Bonnefoy <[email protected]>
Cc: Michael Paquier <[email protected]>
Cc: Thomas Munro <[email protected]>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Fix uninitialized xl_running_xacts padding
Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2026 12:43:18 +0000
Message-ID: <[email protected]> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CALzhyqxrc1ZHYmf5V8NE+yMboqVg7xZrQM7K2c7VS0p1v8z42w@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAO6_XqpGYneOe357s4QhOTYpU6UEgk3JJrBiyeuk-9n=f7p=Vw@mail.gmail.com>
	<aoaj45foewpjtu6r5cs67yrx4en3pkurs23e4azv6tbikpw6c3@h3pnaqaksoeg>
	<[email protected]>
	<[email protected]>
	<CALzhyqzKTRVsQGj+qDDRVs3Oo0EvffuQvVO0v4rbpWU=SoXKug@mail.gmail.com>
	<CALzhyqzLh9iciLMvT9T-Z+o1ekOPpeP2p2r7tYXNZ8JMSea3Zg@mail.gmail.com>
	<[email protected]>
	<CALzhyqy27==NkjnXYysF1zJj_K2rX5kncJZ9fEdTRVszTjJisg@mail.gmail.com>
	<[email protected]>
	<CALzhyqxrc1ZHYmf5V8NE+yMboqVg7xZrQM7K2c7VS0p1v8z42w@mail.gmail.com>

Hi,

On Mon, Mar 16, 2026 at 05:14:10PM +0100, Alexander Kuzmenkov wrote:
> I have removed the unnecessary memsets (for structs with no padding). With
> these changes, and removing the two WAL-related suppressions, the make
> installcheck under Valgrind passes.

Thanks for the patch!

Without the memset part of the patch, I got valgrind's things like:

    214 heap_multi_insert (heapam.c:2425)
    149 heap_inplace_update_and_unlock (heapam.c:6592)
      5 palloc (mcxt.c:1411)
      3 _bt_getroot (nbtpage.c:348)
      2 log_heap_prune_and_freeze (pruneheap.c:2171)
      2 LogCurrentRunningXacts (standby.c:1356)
      1 vacuumRedirectAndPlaceholder (spgvacuum.c:495)
      1 _bt_set_cleanup_info (nbtpage.c:234)
      1 ??? (in /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libcrypto.so.3)

and none with the patch applied. So the proposed changes look good to me.

One comment regarding the new memset(s) in the patch, I wonder if we should:

1/ Add a comment on top of them explaining why we are doing this and why
we don't use {0} (cf. Andres's point about C23 up-thread)

or

2/ Create a new macro, say INITIALIZE_PADDING or such with the comment on
top of it. That way, we could do things like:


+	INITIALIZE_PADDING(xlrec);
instead of
+	memset(&xlrec, 0, sizeof(xlrec));

I think that it would make the intent more clear and we could switch to {0} in a 
single place (if we feel the need) once C23 is required.

Regards,

-- 
Bertrand Drouvot
PostgreSQL Contributors Team
RDS Open Source Databases
Amazon Web Services: https://aws.amazon.com





view thread (16+ messages)  latest in thread

reply
Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Reply to all the recipients using the --to and --cc options:
  reply via email

  To: [email protected]
  Cc: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
  Subject: Re: Fix uninitialized xl_running_xacts padding
  In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

This inbox is served by agora; see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox