On Mon, Apr 23, 2018 at 3:38 PM, Thomas Gummerer <t.gummerer@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> There are two members of 'struct add_opts', which are only used inside
> the 'add()' function, but being part of 'struct add_opts' they are
> needlessly also passed to the 'add_worktree' function.
>
> Make them local to the 'add()' function to make it clearer where they
> are used.
>
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gummerer <t.gummerer@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> diff --git a/builtin/worktree.c b/builtin/worktree.c
> @@ -27,8 +27,6 @@ struct add_opts {
> int keep_locked;
> - const char *new_branch;
> - int force_new_branch;
> };
> @@ -395,33 +394,32 @@ static int add(int ac, const char **av, const char *prefix)
> - if (ac < 2 && !opts.new_branch && !opts.detach) {
> + if (ac < 2 && !new_branch && !opts.detach) {
> int n;
> const char *s = worktree_basename(path, &n);
> - opts.new_branch = xstrndup(s, n);
> + new_branch = xstrndup(s, n);
Sorry for not noticing this earlier, but when 'new_branch' was part of
'opts', this leaked xstrndup'd string was covered by the UNLEAK(opts)
at the end of the function. However, now that 'new_branch' is a
standalone variable, it needs its own UNLEAK().
