Re: [PATCH v4 15/27] fast-import.c: change update_branch to use ref transactions

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

 



On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 7:18 PM, Eric Sunshine <sunshine@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 6:54 PM, Ronnie Sahlberg <sahlberg@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Change update_branch() to use ref transactions for updates.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Ronnie Sahlberg <sahlberg@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>>  fast-import.c | 20 ++++++++++++--------
>>  1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/fast-import.c b/fast-import.c
>> index fb4738d..300c8dc 100644
>> --- a/fast-import.c
>> +++ b/fast-import.c
>> @@ -1678,36 +1678,40 @@ found_entry:
>>  static int update_branch(struct branch *b)
>>  {
>>         static const char *msg = "fast-import";
>> -       struct ref_lock *lock;
>> +       struct ref_transaction *transaction;
>>         unsigned char old_sha1[20];
>> +       struct strbuf err = STRBUF_INIT;
>>
>>         if (is_null_sha1(b->sha1))
>>                 return 0;
>>         if (read_ref(b->name, old_sha1))
>>                 hashclr(old_sha1);
>> -       lock = lock_any_ref_for_update(b->name, old_sha1, 0, NULL);
>> -       if (!lock)
>> -               return error("Unable to lock %s", b->name);
>>         if (!force_update && !is_null_sha1(old_sha1)) {
>>                 struct commit *old_cmit, *new_cmit;
>>
>>                 old_cmit = lookup_commit_reference_gently(old_sha1, 0);
>>                 new_cmit = lookup_commit_reference_gently(b->sha1, 0);
>>                 if (!old_cmit || !new_cmit) {
>> -                       unlock_ref(lock);
>>                         return error("Branch %s is missing commits.", b->name);
>>                 }
>>
>>                 if (!in_merge_bases(old_cmit, new_cmit)) {
>> -                       unlock_ref(lock);
>>                         warning("Not updating %s"
>>                                 " (new tip %s does not contain %s)",
>>                                 b->name, sha1_to_hex(b->sha1), sha1_to_hex(old_sha1));
>>                         return -1;
>>                 }
>>         }
>> -       if (write_ref_sha1(lock, b->sha1, msg) < 0)
>> -               return error("Unable to update %s", b->name);
>> +       transaction = ref_transaction_begin();
>> +       if ((!transaction ||
>> +           ref_transaction_update(transaction, b->name, b->sha1, old_sha1,
>> +                                  0, 1)) ||
>> +           (ref_transaction_commit(transaction, msg, &err) &&
>> +            !(transaction = NULL))) {
>> +               ref_transaction_rollback(transaction);
>> +               return error("Unable to update branch %s: %s", b->name,
>> +                            strbuf_detach(&err, NULL));
>
> Iffy strbuf handling. The strbuf content is being leaked here whether
> detached or not.
>

Thanks!

I have updated this and all other patches to make sure we do a
strbuf_release() any time we have
added to the string.

I also did a quick audit of the strbuf_detach() use in builtin/*
(which I based my use on)
and there seems to be quite common that strbuf_detach() is used in a
way that will leak memory.


I will make a note and perhaps audit all the other strbuf_detach()
calls for a future patch series.




>> +       }
>>         return 0;
>>  }
>>
>> --
>> 1.9.1.528.g98b8868.dirty
--
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]