Re: [PATCH v4 00/13] object store: alloc

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

 



On Thu, 10 May 2018 10:32:09 -0700
Stefan Beller <sbeller@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> >  - I would call them release_commit() and release_tag(), to match
> >    strbuf_release().
> 
> Why not commit_release and tag_release to also have the same order
> of words as in strbuf_release ?

At this point in the discussion, either is fine.

> >  - It might be better to just inline the handling of releasing commit
> >    and tag memory. This code already knows that, for a tree, it needs to
> >    free its buffer and only its buffer, so it is not much of a stretch
> >    to think that it similarly knows the details of commit and tag
> >    objects too.
> 
> We still call out to free_tree_buffer? Not sure I understand.

I meant that since we call out to free_tree_buffer (as you said), this
shows that the code knows the internal details of a tree object (in that
it has a buffer, and that needs to be freed, and that is the only thing
that needs to be freed), so maybe the code should operate on the
internal details of commits and tags as well. But again, this is a minor
point.



[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