Am 30.05.2013 14:04, schrieb Felipe Contreras:
On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 6:34 AM, René Scharfe
<> wrote:
The merge functions duplicate entries as needed and they don't free
them.  Release them in unpack_nondirectories, the same function
where they were allocated, after we're done.

Ah, you beat me to this change, but..

@@ -600,9 +600,14 @@ static int unpack_nondirectories(int n, unsigned long mask,
                 src[i + o->merge] = create_ce_entry(info, names + i, stage);

-       if (o->merge)
-               return call_unpack_fn((const struct cache_entry * const *)src,
-                                     o);
+       if (o->merge) {
+               int rc = call_unpack_fn((const struct cache_entry * const *)src,
+                                       o);
+               for (i = 1; i <= n; i++)
+                       if (src[i] && src[i] != o->df_conflict_entry)
+                               free(src[i]);

Doesn't it make more sense to follow the code above and do src[i + o->merge]?

Not sure I understand. Is the goal to avoid confusion for code readers by using the same indexing method for allocation and release? Or are you worried about o->merge having a different value than 1 in that loop?

We'd have to add 1 (== o->merge) to each index variable usage with a zero-based loop. A one-based loop avoids that, and while it's not pretty it's also not too complicated, I think.


To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at

Reply via email to