Re: [PATCH] remote: initialize values that might not be set
From: Johannes Schindelin <hidden>
Date: 2021-06-07 21:59:25
Hi Stolee, On Mon, 7 Jun 2021, Derrick Stolee via GitGitGadget wrote:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
From: Derrick Stolee <redacted> I noticed during an unrelated test with Valgrind that these variables might be left un-set by stat_tracking_info() in some cases. Initialize them so that a later branch upon their value is consistent. Signed-off-by: Derrick Stolee <redacted> --- remote: initialize values that might not be set A very minor fixup. Thanks, -Stolee Published-As: https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git/releases/tag/pr-974%2Fderrickstolee%2Fremote-uninitialized-v1 Fetch-It-Via: git fetch https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git pr-974/derrickstolee/remote-uninitialized-v1 Pull-Request: https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git/pull/974 remote.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)diff --git a/remote.c b/remote.c index c3f85c17ca7c..a116392fb057 100644 --- a/remote.c +++ b/remote.c@@ -2101,7 +2101,7 @@ int stat_tracking_info(struct branch *branch, int *num_ours, int *num_theirs, int format_tracking_info(struct branch *branch, struct strbuf *sb, enum ahead_behind_flags abf) { - int ours, theirs, sti; + int ours = 0, theirs = 0, sti = 0;
While I like this change, I am somewhat confused where the values are used for branching. The only time I see them used when `stat_branch_pair()` has _not_ initialized `ours` and `theirs` is in those `trace2_data_intmax()` calls. Otherwise `sti` is set to -1 and the other users of `ours` and `theirs` aren't reached. If my reading of the code is correct, maybe the commit message could be adjusted to talk about tracing instead of branching? Thanks, Dscho
const char *full_base; char *base; int upstream_is_gone = 0; base-commit: 71ca53e8125e36efbda17293c50027d31681a41f -- gitgitgadget