Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes: > The more interesting question is whether it causes any use-after-free > bugs. Thanks for mentioning this. All the "plug more leaks" patches make me worried for exactly that. Another is a potential subtle breakage hidden by use of FREE_AND_NULL() and friends, which the sanitizers would probably not see, but can appear as behaviour change. > I don't think it does, and certainly SANITIZE=address agrees. ;-) > -- >8 -- > Subject: [PATCH] bisect: stop leaking strvec in bisect_rev_setup() > > Back when 8a534b6124 (bisect: use argv_array API, 2011-09-13) was > written, it was not safe to free the argv we had passed to > setup_revisions() until the actual traversal was done. > > But since then, we've had many cleanups that makes this safe; e.g., > df835d3a0c (add_rev_cmdline(): make a copy of the name argument, > 2013-05-25) and 31faeb2088 (object_array_entry: fix memory handling of > the name field, 2013-05-25). The comment here is now out-dated; we can > just clear the strvec rather than leaking. > > Note that there's still a small leak because of the way > setup_revisions() handles removed elements internally. That will be > fixed in a subsequent patch. > > Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> > --- > bisect.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/bisect.c b/bisect.c > index 421470bfa5..9cce23e929 100644 > --- a/bisect.c > +++ b/bisect.c > @@ -670,7 +670,7 @@ static void bisect_rev_setup(struct repository *r, struct rev_info *revs, > read_bisect_paths(&rev_argv); > > setup_revisions(rev_argv.nr, rev_argv.v, revs, NULL); > - /* XXX leak rev_argv, as "revs" may still be pointing to it */ > + strvec_clear(&rev_argv); > } > > static void bisect_common(struct rev_info *revs)
