On Fri, Jan 14, 2022 at 07:12:15PM +0100, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 13 2022, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > > Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > >> There are a few "oops, what we merged recently is broken" topics > >> that still are not in 'master', but otherwise what we have should > >> be pretty much what we'll have in the final one. > >> > >> - I am reasonably happy with ab/refs-errno-cleanup (just one patch) > >> that fixes the incorrect state of the code left by the earlier > >> parts of the topic that have already been merged during this > >> cycle. > >> > >> - I am also OK with ab/reftable-build-fixes (two patches), one for > >> general type correctness fix, the other for helping older sub-C99 > >> compilers. > >> > >> If there are fixes for regressions that we introduced during this > >> cycle other than these two topics, I certainly am missing them, so > >> please holler loudly and quickly, hopefully in time for me to tag > >> the -rc1 tomorrow. > > > > Oh, by the way, the tip of 'seen' has consistently failing the > > leak-check test. I didn't have chance, time or energy to see if > > they are failing merely because an existing test script that used to > > be leak-clean gained a use of command that has been known to be > > leak-unclean without introducing any new leaks, or our recent change > > did introduce new leaks to commands that have been leak-clean. > > Somebody with too much time on their hand should go in and check to > > help, before CI testing on 'seen' becomes useful again. > > It's a regression in > ps/avoid-unnecessary-hook-invocation-with-packed-refs, Patrick could you > look into it? On your current "seen" doing a: > > git revert -m 1 48b388cbf31 > > Will make those 3x failing tests pass: > https://github.com/git/git/runs/4811683950?check_suite_focus=true > > (That commit being: 48b388cbf31 (Merge branch > 'ps/avoid-unnecessary-hook-invocation-with-packed-refs' into seen, > 2022-01-13)) > > I didn't have much time to look now, but this mostly untested fix-up > fixes up the topic under SANITIZE=leak (but may break something else). I > ran the broken tests with SANITIZE=leak, and the normal tests without > SANITIZE=leak, but didn't have time for further testing: > > diff --git a/refs/packed-backend.c b/refs/packed-backend.c > index ff96ee482a0..b8012f97009 100644 > --- a/refs/packed-backend.c > +++ b/refs/packed-backend.c > @@ -1577,6 +1577,7 @@ int packed_refs_delete_refs(struct ref_store *ref_store, > error(_("could not delete references: %s"), err.buf); > } > > + ref_transaction_free(transaction); > strbuf_release(&err); > return ret; > } > > I.e. the moving around of the ref_transaction_free() is at fault > somehow, probably... Thanks for digging! The bug is actually in the files backend, where `files_delete_refs()` has two different exit paths, but I added the free of the packed-refs backend only to one of both. So the following patch fixes it: diff --git a/refs/files-backend.c b/refs/files-backend.c index 9a20cb8fa8..844918cbd8 100644 --- a/refs/files-backend.c +++ b/refs/files-backend.c @@ -1280,6 +1280,7 @@ static int files_delete_refs(struct ref_store *ref_store, const char *msg, result |= error(_("could not remove reference %s"), refname); } + ref_transaction_free(transaction); strbuf_release(&err); return result; I'll send a reroll of my series. Patrick
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
