Stefan Beller <sbel...@google.com> writes: > I am at a loss here after re-reading your answer over and over, > but I think you are asking if patch_id_cmp can break, as > we have a callchain like > > patch_id_cmp > commit_patch_id > (diff_root_tree_oid) > diff_tree_oid > ll_diff_tree_oid > > passing diff_options down there, and patch_id_cmp may have > gotten NULL. > > The answer is no, it was safe. (by accident?) > > That is because we never use hashmap_get_next > on the hashmap that uses patch_id_cmp as the compare > function. > > hashmap_get_next is the only function that does not pass > on a keydata, any other has valid caller provided keydata.
Ah, thanks for clarifying. I think I misread the earlier discussion. So unless somebody goes in to patch-ids.c and adds a call to do get_next, we won't see a breakage, and it is not worth to do a test-patch-ids.c that peeks into the hashmap patch-ids.c uses and does get_next() only to demonstrate a potential future breakage. OK.
