Re: [PATCH 3/3] Correct conditions to free textconv result data
- From
Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
- Date
- Feb 22, 2016, 18:12 UTC
- Message-ID
- <20160222181224.GA4917@sigill.intra.peff.net>
- In-Reply-To
- <20160222180645.GB4587@sigill.intra.peff.net>
On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 01:06:46PM -0500, Jeff King wrote:
> Is there a case I'm missing here where we actually leak memory or try to > free non-allocated memory? I didn't see it.
By the way, I saw only patches 2/3 and 3/3 on the list. So maybe there is something interesting going on in 1/3, or in a cover letter that didn't make it. :)
-Peff