``` ** CID 1444117: (RESOURCE_LEAK) /src/test/test_shared_random.c: 1098 in test_utils_general() /src/test/test_shared_random.c: 1099 in test_utils_general() ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ *** CID 1444117: (RESOURCE_LEAK) /src/test/test_shared_random.c: 1098 in test_utils_general() 1092 "1BDB7C3E973936E4D13A49F37C859B3DC69C429334CF9412E3FEF6399C52D47A"; 1093 srv = tor_malloc_zero(sizeof(*srv)); 1094 srv->num_reveals = 42; 1095 memcpy(srv->value, srv_value, sizeof(srv->value)); 1096 dup_srv = sr_srv_dup(srv); 1097 tt_assert(dup_srv); >>> CID 1444117: (RESOURCE_LEAK) >>> Variable "dup_srv" going out of scope leaks the storage it points to. 1098 tt_u64_op(dup_srv->num_reveals, OP_EQ, srv->num_reveals); 1099 tt_mem_op(dup_srv->value, OP_EQ, srv->value, sizeof(srv->value)); 1100 tor_free(srv); 1101 tor_free(dup_srv); 1102 } 1103 /src/test/test_shared_random.c: 1099 in test_utils_general() 1093 srv = tor_malloc_zero(sizeof(*srv)); 1094 srv->num_reveals = 42; 1095 memcpy(srv->value, srv_value, sizeof(srv->value)); 1096 dup_srv = sr_srv_dup(srv); 1097 tt_assert(dup_srv); 1098 tt_u64_op(dup_srv->num_reveals, OP_EQ, srv->num_reveals); >>> CID 1444117: (RESOURCE_LEAK) >>> Variable "dup_srv" going out of scope leaks the storage it points to. 1099 tt_mem_op(dup_srv->value, OP_EQ, srv->value, sizeof(srv->value)); 1100 tor_free(srv); 1101 tor_free(dup_srv); 1102 } 1103 1104 /* Testing commitments_are_the_same(). Currently, the check is to test the ``` ``` ** CID 1444118: (RESOURCE_LEAK) /src/test/test_shared_random.c: 1098 in test_utils_general() /src/test/test_shared_random.c: 1099 in test_utils_general() ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ *** CID 1444118: (RESOURCE_LEAK) /src/test/test_shared_random.c: 1098 in test_utils_general() 1092 "1BDB7C3E973936E4D13A49F37C859B3DC69C429334CF9412E3FEF6399C52D47A"; 1093 srv = tor_malloc_zero(sizeof(*srv)); 1094 srv->num_reveals = 42; 1095 memcpy(srv->value, srv_value, sizeof(srv->value)); 1096 dup_srv = sr_srv_dup(srv); 1097 tt_assert(dup_srv); >>> CID 1444118: (RESOURCE_LEAK) >>> Variable "srv" going out of scope leaks the storage it points to. 1098 tt_u64_op(dup_srv->num_reveals, OP_EQ, srv->num_reveals); 1099 tt_mem_op(dup_srv->value, OP_EQ, srv->value, sizeof(srv->value)); 1100 tor_free(srv); 1101 tor_free(dup_srv); 1102 } 1103 /src/test/test_shared_random.c: 1099 in test_utils_general() 1093 srv = tor_malloc_zero(sizeof(*srv)); 1094 srv->num_reveals = 42; 1095 memcpy(srv->value, srv_value, sizeof(srv->value)); 1096 dup_srv = sr_srv_dup(srv); 1097 tt_assert(dup_srv); 1098 tt_u64_op(dup_srv->num_reveals, OP_EQ, srv->num_reveals); >>> CID 1444118: (RESOURCE_LEAK) >>> Variable "srv" going out of scope leaks the storage it points to. 1099 tt_mem_op(dup_srv->value, OP_EQ, srv->value, sizeof(srv->value)); 1100 tor_free(srv); 1101 tor_free(dup_srv); 1102 } 1103 1104 /* Testing commitments_are_the_same(). Currently, the check is to test the ``` These look to be only leaks in assertion-failure cases. Maybe make the pointers in question function-scope, or break stuff out into helper functions so the `done` label can properly clean up?