On 05/17/2017 03:17 PM, Jeff King wrote: > On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 02:05:33PM +0200, Michael Haggerty wrote: > >> Instead of using a global `lock_file` instance for the main >> "packed-refs" file and using a pointer in `files_ref_store` to keep >> track of whether it is locked, embed the `lock_file` instance directly >> in the `files_ref_store` struct and use the new >> `is_lock_file_locked()` function to keep track of whether it is >> locked. This keeps related data together and makes the main reference >> store less of a special case. > > This made me wonder how we handle the locking for ref_stores besides the > main one (e.g., for submodules). The lockfile structs have to remain > valid for the length of the program. Previously those stores could have > xcalloc()'d a lockfile and just leaked it. Now they'll need to xcalloc() > and leak their whole structs. > > I suspect the answer is "we don't ever lock anything except the main ref > store because that is the only one we write to", so it doesn't matter > anyway. Correct. If that ever changes, we'll be ready! Michael