Đoàn Trần Công Danh <congdanhqx@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> On 2021-08-05 13:10:51+0530, Atharva Raykar <raykar.ath@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> [...]
>> + add_data.sm_path = xstrdup(argv[1]);
>
> add_data.sm_path is allocated in this block (regardless of legs).
>
>> [...]
>> + if ((exit_code = pipe_command(&cp, NULL, 0, NULL, 0, &sb, 0))) {
>> + strbuf_complete_line(&sb);
>> + fputs(sb.buf, stderr);
>> + return exit_code;
>
> But, we don't free it when return from here.
>
>> [...]
>> +
>> + if (add_submodule(&add_data))
>> + return 1;
>
> And here.
>
>> + configure_added_submodule(&add_data);
>> + free(add_data.sm_path);
>
> However, it will be free()-d here, is it intended?
Yeah I meant to have it free()'d wherever possible, although I suppose
it isn't strictly necessary since we exit.
> I think we may use UNLEAK above (for now) because we will exit process
> after this function.
>
> However, I anticipated we may need to do more stuffs after this
> function in the future.
Right. So it's better I ensure that it's freed properly everywhere.
>> [...]
>> --
>> 2.32.0
>>
