On 3/9/2022 9:34 AM, Derrick Stolee wrote: > On 3/9/2022 8:16 AM, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote: >> == For Junio == >> >> This has a trivially resolved conflict with Derrick Stolee's >> aaf251cdc5c (revision: put object filter into struct rev_info, >> 2022-03-08) currently in "seen" in builtin/rev-list.c. >> >> The resolution is to just keep the "goto cleanup" in place of "return >> 0" in the conflicting lines, but to otherwise keep Derrick's version. >> >> It will pass with/without SANITIZE=leak when applied to both "master" >> and "seen". I omitted one test change (described in a relevant commit >> message) due to the latter not being true (no fault of "seen", just a >> new leaking command being added to a test). > > Since ds/partial-bundles will soon be updated in v4 to change the > pointer added to struct rev_info, it is even more likely that there > will be more important things to do with regards to clearing the > memory of rev_infos based on that change. It might be better to wait > for that update (coming soon) and then rebase directly on top. I took a look at the series as it stands now and have a few nits here and there. Generally, things are pretty standard in this kind of series you've been working diligently on for a while. The only thing I can recommend is to check that your leak-check statements are still true when reaching the end of the series, now that the filter member exists. Likely the tests that you are marking as leak-free do nothing with object filters, so they will still be true. Just something to keep in mind and maybe add a patch that recursively frees the contents of 'revs->filter' at the end. Thanks, -Stolee
