Re: [PATCH] parse_object: clear "parsed" when freeing buffers

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Jonathon Mah <jmah@xxxxxx> writes:

> Add a new function "free_object_buffer", which marks the object as
> un-parsed and frees the buffer. Only trees and commits have buffers;
> other types are not affected. If the tree or commit buffer is already
> NULL, the "parsed" flag is still cleared so callers can control the free
> themselves (index-pack.c uses this).
>
> Several areas of code would free buffers for object structs that
> contained them ("struct tree" and "struct commit"), but without clearing
> the "parsed" flag. parse_object would clear the flag for "struct tree",
> but commits would remain in an invalid state (marked as parsed but with
> a NULL buffer). Because the objects are uniqued (ccdc6037fee), the
> invalid objects stay around and can lead to bad behavior.
>
> In particular, running pickaxe on all refs in a repository with a cached
> textconv could segfault. If the textconv cache ref was evaluated first
> by cmd_log_walk, a subsequent notes_cache_match_validity call would
> dereference NULL.

Conceptually this is a right thing to do, but it is unclear why this
conversion is safe in the existing code.

A codepath that used to free() and assign NULL to a buffer without
resetting .parsed would have assumed that it can find out the parsed
properties of the object (e.g. .parents) without re-parsing the
object, and much more importantly, the modifications made by that
codepath will not be clobbered by later call to parse_object().

IIRC, revision traversal machinery rewrites commit->parents but
discards buffer when it knows that the log message is not needed
(save_commit_buffer controls this behaviour).  I do not offhand know
if there are other instances of existing code that depend on the
current behaviour, but have you audited all the codepaths that are
affected by this patch and codepaths that work on objects this patch
unmarks their .parsed field will not have such a problem?

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html


[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]