Elijah Newren <newren@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> unpack-trees.c | 17 ++++++++++++++---
> 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/unpack-trees.c b/unpack-trees.c
> index e73745051e..08f6cab82e 100644
> --- a/unpack-trees.c
> +++ b/unpack-trees.c
> @@ -1284,9 +1284,20 @@ int unpack_trees(unsigned len, struct tree_desc *t, struct unpack_trees_options
> o->result.timestamp.sec = o->src_index->timestamp.sec;
> o->result.timestamp.nsec = o->src_index->timestamp.nsec;
> o->result.version = o->src_index->version;
> - o->result.split_index = o->src_index->split_index;
> - if (o->result.split_index)
> + if (!o->src_index->split_index) {
> + o->result.split_index = NULL;
> + } else if (o->src_index == o->dst_index) {
> + /*
> + * o->dst_index (and thus o->src_index) will be discarded
> + * and overwritten with o->result at the end of this function,
> + * so just use src_index's split_index to avoid having to
> + * create a new one.
> + */
> + o->result.split_index = o->src_index->split_index;
> o->result.split_index->refcount++;
> + } else {
> + o->result.split_index = init_split_index(&o->result);
> + }
> hashcpy(o->result.sha1, o->src_index->sha1);
> o->merge_size = len;
> mark_all_ce_unused(o->src_index);
> @@ -1412,7 +1423,7 @@ int unpack_trees(unsigned len, struct tree_desc *t, struct unpack_trees_options
> WRITE_TREE_SILENT |
> WRITE_TREE_REPAIR);
> }
> - move_index_extensions(&o->result, o->dst_index);
> + move_index_extensions(&o->result, o->src_index);
Can src_index be NULL here? I am getting segfaults everywhere,
starting from t0000-basic that populates the index by reading one
tree object via read-tree.
> discard_index(o->dst_index);
> *o->dst_index = o->result;
> } else {
