Re: [PATCH v6 25/25] refs: break out ref conflict checks

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

 



On 11/04/2015 10:01 PM, David Turner wrote:
> On Tue, 2015-11-03 at 08:40 +0100, Michael Haggerty wrote:
>> + * extras and skip must be sorted lists of reference names. Either one
>> + * can be NULL, signifying the empty list.
>> + */
> 
> My version had:
> 
> "skip can be NULL; extras cannot."
> 
> The first thing that function does is:
> string_list_find_insert_index(extras, dirname, 0)
> 
> And that crashes when extras is null.  So I think my version is correct
> here.

We're talking about the function find_descendant_ref(), which was added
in this patch, right? Because the first thing that function does is

+	if (!extras)
+		return NULL;

(This guard was in your version, too.) Also, the callsite doesn't
protect against extras==NULL. So either we're talking about two
different things here, or I disagree with you.

> Other than that, I've reviewed both the patches themselves and the
> overall diff and everything looks good to me.

Thanks!

Michael

-- 
Michael Haggerty
mhagger@xxxxxxxxxxxx

--
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]