From: Shreyansh Paliwal <shreyanshpaliwalcmsmn@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 05 Feb 2026 12:04:14 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH V2 2/3] wt-status: pass struct repository and wt_status through function parameters
Message-ID: <20260205121545.36442-1-shreyanshpaliwalcmsmn@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAOLa=ZSkTH8KC04KubktP1EkU4EHYs0CtmUPkPVe74zi0wcTBA@mail.gmail.com>

> > Some functions in wt-status.c relied on the_repository because no
> > repository instance was available in their local scope.
> > There is also a specific case in wt_status_check_rebase() where the
> > worktree can be NULL, so accessing wt->repo may lead to a segfault.
> >
> > Update these functions to accept a struct repository or struct
> > wt_status parameter, and adjust callers accordingly. Replace the
> > remaining uses of the_repository in these functions with the
> > passed-in repository instance.
> >
> > This removes the use of the_repository global variable from
> > wt-status.c completely.
> >
> 
> Okay, but this doesn't fix the issue I stated in the previous commit. I
> do wonder if we can re-order the commits and pass the repo struct to
> functions like 'get_branch()'.

Sorry, I didn’t fully think through what you were pointing out in the
previous version. I initially assumed you were only referring to the
specific call involving wt_status_check_rebase(NULL, state).

So struct worktree *wt is not guaranteed to be defined and can be
NULL. Because of that, relying on wt->repo is unsafe.
Instead, rather than depending on the worktree for repository access (wt->repo),
we can pass struct repository explicitly through the relevant call
stack, like in functions get_branch() and wt_status_check_bisect().
I hope I have understood it correctly.

Best,
Shreyansh