Re: [PATCH v2] sha1_name: fix uninitialized memory errors

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

 



On 2/28/2018 3:50 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Derrick Stolee <dstolee@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

diff --git a/sha1_name.c b/sha1_name.c
index 611c7d24dd..a041d8d24f 100644
--- a/sha1_name.c
+++ b/sha1_name.c
@@ -547,15 +547,15 @@ static void find_abbrev_len_for_pack(struct packed_git *p,
  	 */
  	mad->init_len = 0;
  	if (!match) {
-		nth_packed_object_oid(&oid, p, first);
-		extend_abbrev_len(&oid, mad);
+		if (nth_packed_object_oid(&oid, p, first))
+			extend_abbrev_len(&oid, mad);
  	} else if (first < num - 1) {
-		nth_packed_object_oid(&oid, p, first + 1);
-		extend_abbrev_len(&oid, mad);
+		if (nth_packed_object_oid(&oid, p, first + 1))
+			extend_abbrev_len(&oid, mad);
  	}
  	if (first > 0) {
-		nth_packed_object_oid(&oid, p, first - 1);
-		extend_abbrev_len(&oid, mad);
+		if (nth_packed_object_oid(&oid, p, first - 1))
+			extend_abbrev_len(&oid, mad);
  	}
  	mad->init_len = mad->cur_len;
  }
I do not think they are wrong, but aren't the latter two somewhat
redundant?  "num" is p->num_objects, and we call (first+1)th element
only after we see (first < num - 1), i.e. first+1 < num, and the
access to (first-1)th is done only when first > 0.  The first one,
i.e. when first points at where we _would_ find it if it existed,
can access "first" that could be p->num_objects, so the change there
makes sense, though.


Yes. But I'd rather keep the blocks consistent and use the return value of nth_packed_object_oid() when possible.

Thanks,
-Stolee



[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]

  Powered by Linux