git/list[1] front-page[2] threads[3] people[4] search[5] about
 

[PATCH] Fix handle leak in write_tree

From
Alex Riesen <raa.lkml@gmail.com>
Date
Apr 23, 2007, 19:49 UTC
Message-ID
<20070423194925.GA5163@steel.home>

This is a quick and dirty fix for the broken "git cherry-pick -n" on some broken OS, which does not remove the directory entry after unlink succeeded(!) if the file is still open somewher. The entry is left but "protected": no open, no unlink, no stat. Very annoying.

Signed-off-by: Alex Riesen <raa.lkml@gmail.com>
---

That should be enough to get going, but I have to say that the interface to lockfiles is really troublesome. Why has the caller close a handle it didn't open? Especially if there are perfect matches for the opening function (hold_locked_index) in form of commit and rollback?

How about something like this (just interface):
struct lock_file
{
	struct lock_file *next;
	pid_t owner;
	int fd;
	char on_list;
	char filename[PATH_MAX];
};

struct lock_file *open_locked(const char *path, int die_on_error); struct lock_file *open_index_locked(int die_on_error); void commit_lock_file(struct lock_file *); /* always assuming .lock */ void rollback_lock_file(struct lock_file *);

 builtin-write-tree.c |    7 ++++++-
 1 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
diff --git a/builtin-write-tree.c b/builtin-write-tree.c
index c88bbd1..d8284b4 100644
--- a/builtin-write-tree.c
+++ b/builtin-write-tree.c
@@ -29,6 +29,7 @@ int write_tree(unsigned char *sha1, int missing_ok, const char *prefix)
 
 	was_valid = cache_tree_fully_valid(active_cache_tree);
 
+	close(newfd);
 	if (!was_valid) {
 		if (cache_tree_update(active_cache_tree,
 				      active_cache, active_nr,
@@ -36,8 +37,10 @@ int write_tree(unsigned char *sha1, int missing_ok, const char *prefix)
 			die("git-write-tree: error building trees");
 		if (0 <= newfd) {
 			if (!write_cache(newfd, active_cache, active_nr)
-					&& !close(newfd))
+					&& !close(newfd)) {
 				commit_lock_file(lock_file);
+				newfd = -1;
+			}
 		}
 		/* Not being able to write is fine -- we are only interested
 		 * in updating the cache-tree part, and if the next caller
@@ -55,6 +58,8 @@ int write_tree(unsigned char *sha1, int missing_ok, const char *prefix)
 	else
 		hashcpy(sha1, active_cache_tree->sha1);
 
+	if (0 <= newfd)
+		close(newfd);
 	rollback_lock_file(lock_file);
 
 	return 0;
-- 
1.5.1.1.946.gdb75a
Next: Junio C Hamano
Message 1 of 7 in “Fix handle leak in write_tree”
  1. Fix handle leak in write_treeAlex Riesen, Apr 23, 2007
  2. Junio C HamanoApr 24, 2007
  3. Alex RiesenApr 24, 2007
  4. Junio C HamanoApr 24, 2007
  5. Alex RiesenApr 25, 2007
  6. Junio C HamanoApr 25, 2007
  7. Fix handle leak in write_treeAlex Riesen, Apr 25, 2007

Read the whole thread, see it on lore, or plain text.

$ cat FOOTERMessages come from the public archive at lore.kernel.org/git, fetched every hour. The front page is chosen and written each morning by an AI editor and can be wrong; the threads themselves are the record. About and API. For agents: an MCP server at https://gitlist.dev/mcp, and any thread, story or person page as Markdown by adding .md to its URL (or sending Accept: text/markdown). Details in /llms.txt.