> diff --git a/pack-bitmap-write.c b/pack-bitmap-write.c
> index f2f0b6b2c2..d2d46ff5f4 100644
> --- a/pack-bitmap-write.c
> +++ b/pack-bitmap-write.c
> @@ -333,6 +333,7 @@ void bitmap_writer_build(struct packing_data *to_pack)
> struct commit *commit = bb.commits[i-1];
> struct bb_commit *ent = bb_data_at(&bb.data, commit);
> struct commit *child;
> + int reused = 0;
>
> fill_bitmap_commit(ent, commit);
>
Before the following chunk is the start of a loop:
"while ((child = pop_commit(&ent->children))) {"
> @@ -348,10 +349,15 @@ void bitmap_writer_build(struct packing_data *to_pack)
>
> if (child_ent->bitmap)
> bitmap_or(child_ent->bitmap, ent->bitmap);
> - else
> + else if (reused)
> child_ent->bitmap = bitmap_dup(ent->bitmap);
> + else {
> + child_ent->bitmap = ent->bitmap;
> + reused = 1;
> + }
> }
> - bitmap_free(ent->bitmap);
> + if (!reused)
> + bitmap_free(ent->bitmap);
> ent->bitmap = NULL;
> }
> bitmap_builder_clear(&bb);
> --
> 2.29.2.312.gabc4d358d8
So this is clearly correct.
I asked myself if this optimization is worth it when we're going to
drastically reduce the number of steps in patch 18, but I think that the
answer is still yes.
