Am 30.05.2013 14:04, schrieb Felipe Contreras:
On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 6:34 AM, René Scharfe
<rene.scharfe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
The merge functions duplicate entries as needed and they don't free
them. Release them in unpack_nondirectories, the same function
where they were allocated, after we're done.
Ah, you beat me to this change, but..
@@ -600,9 +600,14 @@ static int unpack_nondirectories(int n, unsigned long mask,
src[i + o->merge] = create_ce_entry(info, names + i, stage);
}
- if (o->merge)
- return call_unpack_fn((const struct cache_entry * const *)src,
- o);
+ if (o->merge) {
+ int rc = call_unpack_fn((const struct cache_entry * const *)src,
+ o);
+ for (i = 1; i <= n; i++)
+ if (src[i] && src[i] != o->df_conflict_entry)
+ free(src[i]);
Doesn't it make more sense to follow the code above and do src[i + o->merge]?
Not sure I understand. Is the goal to avoid confusion for code readers
by using the same indexing method for allocation and release? Or are
you worried about o->merge having a different value than 1 in that loop?
We'd have to add 1 (== o->merge) to each index variable usage with a
zero-based loop. A one-based loop avoids that, and while it's not
pretty it's also not too complicated, I think.
René
--
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