Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes:
> On Wed, Mar 05, 2025 at 06:39:01PM +0100, Karthik Nayak wrote:
>
>> @@ -1456,6 +1471,13 @@ static enum ref_transaction_error write_with_updates(struct packed_ref_store *re
>> update->refname,
>> oid_to_hex(&update->old_oid));
>> return REF_TRANSACTION_ERROR_NONEXISTENT_REF;
>> +
>> + if (ref_transaction_maybe_set_rejected(transaction, i, ret)) {
>> + strbuf_setlen(err, 0);
>> + ret = 0;
>> + continue;
>> + }
>> +
>> goto error;
>> }
>> }
>
> This new code isn't reachable, since we return in the lines shown in the
> diff context.
>
> Should it have been "ret = REF_TRANSACTION_ERROR"... in the first place?
> I think the "goto error" was already unreachable, so possibly the error
> is in an earlier patch. (I didn't look; Coverity flagged this in the
> final state in 'jch').
Sorry about that. It shows that I lack the bandwidth necessary to
go through fine toothed comb on all the topics I queue. Perhaps I
should be more selective and queue only the ones I personally had
enough bandwidth to look over (or have seen clear "I looked each and
every line of this series with fine toothed comb, put reviewed-by:
me" messages sent by trusted reviewers) while ignoring others?
I dunno.
Thanks.
