Jacob Keller <jacob.e.kel...@intel.com> writes:
> @@ -290,12 +289,6 @@ static int prepare_submodule_summary(struct rev_info
> *rev, const char *path,
> add_pending_object(rev, &left->object, path);
> add_pending_object(rev, &right->object, path);
> merge_bases = get_merge_bases(left, right);
> - if (merge_bases) {
> - if (merge_bases->item == left)
> - *fast_forward = 1;
> - else if (merge_bases->item == right)
> - *fast_backward = 1;
> - }
> for (list = merge_bases; list; list = list->next) {
> list->item->object.flags |= UNINTERESTING;
> add_pending_object(rev, &list->item->object,
Not a new issue with this patch, but I wonder if this commit_list is
leaking here.
> + /*
> + * Warn about missing commits in the submodule project, but only if
> + * they aren't null.
> + */
> + if ((!is_null_oid(one) && !*left) ||
> + (!is_null_oid(two) && !*right))
> + message = "(commits not present)";
> +
> + merge_bases = get_merge_bases(*left, *right);
> + if (merge_bases) {
> + if (merge_bases->item == *left)
> + fast_forward = 1;
> + else if (merge_bases->item == *right)
> + fast_backward = 1;
> + }
And probably merge_bases also leaks here.
It is not cheap to compute merge bases, but show_submodule_summary()
makes two calls to get_merge_bases(), one in show_submodule_header()
and then another inside prepare_submodule_summary() to compute
exactly the same set of merge bases. We somehow need to reduce it
to just one.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
