Re: [PATCH v2 13/14] Provide free_directory() for reclaiming dir_struct memory

Michael Haggerty [off-list ref] writes:

On 09/20/2012 09:46 PM, Adam Spiers wrote:

quoted

Signed-off-by: Adam Spiers <redacted>
---
 Documentation/technical/api-directory-listing.txt |  2 ++
 dir.c                                             | 23 +++++++++++++++++++++--
 dir.h                                             |  1 +
 3 files changed, 24 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/Documentation/technical/api-directory-listing.txt b/Documentation/technical/api-directory-listing.txt
index 944fc39..e339c18 100644
--- a/Documentation/technical/api-directory-listing.txt
+++ b/Documentation/technical/api-directory-listing.txt

@@ -79,4 +79,6 @@ marked. If you to exclude files, make sure you have loaded index first.
 
 * Use `dir.entries[]`.
 
+* Call `free_directory()` when none of the contained elements are no longer in use.
+
 (JC)

[...]

diff --git a/dir.h b/dir.h
index ebb0367..7da29da 100644
--- a/dir.h
+++ b/dir.h

@@ -128,6 +128,7 @@ extern void add_excludes_from_file(struct dir_struct *, const char *fname);
 extern void add_exclude(const char *string, const char *base,
 			int baselen, struct exclude_list *el, const char *src, int srcpos);
 extern void free_excludes(struct exclude_list *el);
+extern void free_directory(struct dir_struct *dir);
 extern int file_exists(const char *);
 
 extern int is_inside_dir(const char *dir);

With I see a function like this, the first question in my head is always
"does it also free(dir), or does it only free the substructures, leaving
dir empty but allocated?"  There should be a comment documenting the
behavior.  I also find it helpful if a function that frees the top-level
structure has "free" in the name, while a function that only empties the
top-level structure without freeing it *not* have free in the name
(e.g., "clear_directory()").  But maybe that's just me.

All good points, including the last one.  Thanks.