Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > Glen Choo <chooglen@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > >> Signed-off-by: Glen Choo <chooglen@xxxxxxxxxx> >> --- >> branch.c | 5 +++-- >> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/branch.c b/branch.c >> index be33fe09fa..1e9a585633 100644 >> --- a/branch.c >> +++ b/branch.c >> @@ -239,7 +239,7 @@ static void setup_tracking(const char *new_ref, const char *orig_ref, >> if (track != BRANCH_TRACK_INHERIT) >> for_each_remote(find_tracked_branch, &tracking); >> else if (inherit_tracking(&tracking, orig_ref)) >> - return; >> + goto cleanup; >> >> if (!tracking.matches) >> switch (track) { >> @@ -249,7 +249,7 @@ static void setup_tracking(const char *new_ref, const char *orig_ref, >> case BRANCH_TRACK_INHERIT: >> break; >> default: >> - return; >> + goto cleanup; >> } >> >> if (tracking.matches > 1) >> @@ -262,6 +262,7 @@ static void setup_tracking(const char *new_ref, const char *orig_ref, >> tracking.remote, tracking.srcs) < 0) >> exit(-1); >> >> +cleanup: >> string_list_clear(tracking.srcs, 0); > > Makes sense. There is no other exit paths out of the function after > the tracking_srcs variable gets initialized, so this should be > covering everything. > > Two tangential findings: > > * I see exit(-1) in the precontext of the final hunk. We probably > would want to fix it, as negative argument to exit(3) is > misleading (the standard makes it clear that only the least > significant 8 bits matter, so it is not that bad). Thanks for the reminder. We had this discussion previously and the conclusion was that I would send this cleanup as a separate series [1]. Unlike this relatively obvious cleanup, I think exit codes might spark a more involved discussion. > > * At the end, what is cleared is tracking.srcs, but because it is a > pointer to the real resource we allocated on our stack, it would > be cleaner to pass &tracking_srcs instead. Ah yes, that is true. I'll do that. If you (or others) prefer, I can move this patch to its own series, or possibly as part of a grab bag with the exit code fix. > > Both are not what this patch introduces, and are outside the scope > of this series. > > Thanks. [1] https://lore.kernel.org/git/211210.86ee6ldwlc.gmgdl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx