Re: [PATCH 3/4] unpack-trees: plug a memory leak
From: Junio C Hamano <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-15 22:57:32
Felipe Contreras [off-list ref] writes:
quoted hunk
Before overwriting the destination index, first let's discard it's contents. Signed-off-by: Felipe Contreras <redacted> --- unpack-trees.c | 4 +++- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)diff --git a/unpack-trees.c b/unpack-trees.c index ede4299..eff2944 100644 --- a/unpack-trees.c +++ b/unpack-trees.c@@ -1146,8 +1146,10 @@ int unpack_trees(unsigned len, struct tree_desc *t, struct unpack_trees_options o->src_index = NULL; ret = check_updates(o) ? (-2) : 0; - if (o->dst_index) + if (o->dst_index) { + discard_index(o->dst_index); *o->dst_index = o->result; + }
I seem to recall that many callers set src_index and dst_index to the same istate, and expect that the original istate pointed by the src_index to remain usable. Is it safe to discard it like this at this point?
done: clear_exclude_list(&el);