Re: [PATCH v2 7/7] unpack-trees: free cache_entry array members for merges
From: Felipe Contreras <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-15 22:57:31
On Sun, Jun 2, 2013 at 10:46 AM, René Scharfe [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
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. As suggested by Felipe, use the same loop style (zero-based for loop) for freeing as for allocating. Improved-by: Felipe Contreras [off-list ref] Signed-off-by: René Scharfe <redacted> --- unpack-trees.c | 13 ++++++++++--- 1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)diff --git a/unpack-trees.c b/unpack-trees.c index 2dbc05d..57b4074 100644 --- a/unpack-trees.c +++ b/unpack-trees.c@@ -600,9 +600,16 @@ 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 = 0; i < n; i++) { + struct cache_entry *ce = src[i + o->merge]; + if (ce != o->df_conflict_entry)
It's possible that ce is NULL, but you didn't add that check because free(NULL) still works? Or because ce cannot be NULL? If it's the former, I think it's clearer if we check that ce is not NULL either way. Otherwise it's OK by me.
+ free(ce); + } + return rc; + }
-- Felipe Contreras