From: Shreyansh Paliwal <shreyanshpaliwalcmsmn@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2026 15:15:35 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] wt-status: replace uses of the_repository with local repository instances
Message-ID: <20260203151613.36957-1-shreyanshpaliwalcmsmn@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <50791aed-c64b-48fe-8cc7-8cacaec9d295@gmail.com>

> > The replacement of all the_repository with s->repo in this patch are mostly
> > to cases where a repository instance is already available via struct wt_status.
> > 
> > In the current flow, all functions operating on struct wt_status *s
> > are called via commit.c. There, status_init_config() calls
> > wt_status_prepare(), which initializes the struct wt_status and
> > assigns s->repo from the repository instance passed in by the caller.
> > As a result, s->repo is guaranteed to be initialized whenever these
> > functions are invoked.
> > 
> > And commit.c itself still relies on the_repository, within wt-status.c,
> > the local repository pointer refers to the same underlying
> > repository object that the_repository would have pointed to, indirectly
> > until we make commit.c also free of the_repository.
> 
> Good explanation, that would be a very useful addition to the commit message

Sure I will include this in v2.

> >>> @@ -1723,18 +1723,18 @@ int wt_status_check_rebase(const struct worktree *wt,
> >>>   {
> >>>	struct stat st;
> >>>
> >>> -	if (!stat(worktree_git_path(the_repository, wt, "rebase-apply"), &st)) {
> >>> -		if (!stat(worktree_git_path(the_repository, wt, "rebase-apply/applying"), &st)) {
> >>> +	if (!stat(worktree_git_path(wt->repo, wt, "rebase-apply"), &st)) {
> >>> +		if (!stat(worktree_git_path(wt->repo, wt, "rebase-apply/applying"), &st)) {
> >>
> >> In the same file we make a call 'wt_status_check_rebase(NULL, state)',
> >> so wouldn't this break?
> > 
> > Yes my bad, it would throw a segfault error.
> > I think the best way to handle this is to explicitly check for the
> > wt to be valid like this,
> > 
> >      if (wt==NULL)
> >          return 0;
> 
> That would change the behavior of the function though as it will no 
> longer check if the rebase directories exist. You should pass the 
> repository down from the caller.

Yes agreed. 
I will pass s->repo as struct repository *r in this function. Thanks.

Best,
Shreyansh