Re: [PATCH 1/5] convert: initialize attr_action in convert_attrs
flat view
From: Martin Ågren <hidden>
Date: 2017-08-15 14:40:52
On 15 August 2017 at 16:17, Torsten Bögershausen [off-list ref] wrote:
On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 02:53:01PM +0200, Martin Ågren wrote:quoted
convert_attrs populates a struct conv_attrs. The field attr_action is not set in all code paths, but still one caller unconditionally reads it. Since git_check_attr always returns the same value, we'll always end up in the same code path and there is no problem right now. But convert_attrs is obviously trying not to rely on such an implementation-detail of another component. Initialize attr_action to CRLF_UNDEFINED in the dead code path. Actually, in the code path that /is/ taken, the variable is assigned to twice and the first assignment has no effect. That's not wrong, but let's remove that first assignment while we're here. Signed-off-by: Martin Ågren <redacted> --- I hit a warning about attr_action possibly being uninitialized when building with SANITIZE=thread. I guess it's some random interaction between code added by tsan, the optimizer (-O3) and the warning machinery. (This was with gcc 5.4.0.) convert.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)diff --git a/convert.c b/convert.c index 1012462e3..943d957b4 100644 --- a/convert.c +++ b/convert.c@@ -1040,7 +1040,6 @@ static void convert_attrs(struct conv_attrs *ca, const char *path) ca->crlf_action = git_path_check_crlf(ccheck + 4); if (ca->crlf_action == CRLF_UNDEFINED) ca->crlf_action = git_path_check_crlf(ccheck + 0); - ca->attr_action = ca->crlf_action;I don't think the removal of that line is correct.
(Thanks for confirming in a follow-up mail that you meant that you /do/ think the removal is correct.)
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
quoted
ca->ident = git_path_check_ident(ccheck + 1); ca->drv = git_path_check_convert(ccheck + 2); if (ca->crlf_action != CRLF_BINARY) {@@ -1058,6 +1057,7 @@ static void convert_attrs(struct conv_attrs *ca, const char *path) } else { ca->drv = NULL; ca->crlf_action = CRLF_UNDEFINED; + ca->attr_action = CRLF_UNDEFINED;But this one can be avoided, when the line ca->attr_action = ca->crlf_action; would move completely out of the "if/else" block.quoted
ca->ident = 0; } if (ca->crlf_action == CRLF_TEXT) -- 2.14.1.151.gdfeca7a7eThanks for spotting my mess. What do you think about the following:diff --git a/convert.c b/convert.c index 1012462e3c..fd91b91ada 100644 --- a/convert.c +++ b/convert.c@@ -1040,7 +1040,6 @@ static void convert_attrs(struct conv_attrs *ca, const char *path) ca->crlf_action = git_path_check_crlf(ccheck + 4); if (ca->crlf_action == CRLF_UNDEFINED) ca->crlf_action = git_path_check_crlf(ccheck + 0); - ca->attr_action = ca->crlf_action; ca->ident = git_path_check_ident(ccheck + 1); ca->drv = git_path_check_convert(ccheck + 2); if (ca->crlf_action != CRLF_BINARY) {@@ -1060,6 +1059,8 @@ static void convert_attrs(struct conv_attrs *ca, const char *path) ca->crlf_action = CRLF_UNDEFINED; ca->ident = 0; } + /* Save attr and make a decision for action */ + ca->attr_action = ca->crlf_action; if (ca->crlf_action == CRLF_TEXT) ca->crlf_action = text_eol_is_crlf() ? CRLF_TEXT_CRLF : CRLF_TEXT_INPUT; if (ca->crlf_action == CRLF_UNDEFINED && auto_crlf == AUTO_CRLF_FALSE)
Yeah, makes lots of sense. Then we could also remove the second assignment to attr_action. That is, this function would set attr_action at one place, always. I'll do this in a v2. Thanks.