On Sun, Apr 24, 2016 at 9:33 AM, Christian Couder
<[email protected]> wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Christian Couder <[email protected]>
> ---
> diff --git a/builtin/apply.c b/builtin/apply.c
> @@ -1802,8 +1806,10 @@ static int parse_single_patch(struct apply_state
> *state,
> fragment = xcalloc(1, sizeof(*fragment));
> fragment->linenr = state->linenr;
> len = parse_fragment(state, line, size, patch, fragment);
> - if (len <= 0)
> - die(_("corrupt patch at line %d"), state->linenr);
> + if (len <= 0) {
> + free(fragment);
> + return error(_("corrupt patch at line %d"),
> state->linenr);
No fragment leak here, okay.
> + }
> fragment->patch = line;
> fragment->size = len;
> oldlines += fragment->oldlines;
> @@ -1839,9 +1845,9 @@ static int parse_single_patch(struct apply_state *state,
> patch->is_delete = 0;
>
> if (0 < patch->is_new && oldlines)
> - die(_("new file %s depends on old contents"),
> patch->new_name);
> + return error(_("new file %s depends on old contents"),
> patch->new_name);
> if (0 < patch->is_delete && newlines)
> - die(_("deleted file %s still has contents"), patch->old_name);
> + return error(_("deleted file %s still has contents"),
> patch->old_name);
These two return -1 and don't manually release the fragments, which
might seem like a leak, however...
> if (!patch->is_delete && !newlines && context)
> fprintf_ln(stderr,
> _("** warning: "
> @@ -2143,6 +2149,9 @@ static int parse_chunk(struct apply_state *state, char
> *buffer, unsigned long si
> size - offset - hdrsize,
> patch);
>
> + if (patchsize < 0)
> + return -1;
This forwards -1 to its caller, and the caller, apply_patch() does
release the fragments when it sees -1, so there does not seem to be
any (new) leak. Good.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
