Re: [PATCH] send-pack: clean up extra_have oid array

> On Tue, Jul 01, 2025 at 10:40:21AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> 
>> There is an early exit from the function that would bypass these
>> clean-up.  Perhaps something like this on top?
>>
>>  builtin/send-pack.c | 8 +++++---
>>  1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git c/builtin/send-pack.c w/builtin/send-pack.c
>> index b28da7ddd7..6ce9f6665a 100644
>> --- c/builtin/send-pack.c
>> +++ w/builtin/send-pack.c
>> @@ -305,9 +305,10 @@ int cmd_send_pack(int argc,
>>  		flags |= MATCH_REFS_MIRROR;
>>  
>>  	/* match them up */
>> -	if (match_push_refs(local_refs, &remote_refs, &rs, flags))
>> -		return -1;
>> -
>> +	if (match_push_refs(local_refs, &remote_refs, &rs, flags)) {
>> +		ret = -1;
>> +		goto cleanup;
>> +	}
>>  	if (!is_empty_cas(&cas))
>>  		apply_push_cas(&cas, remote, remote_refs);
>>  
>> @@ -340,6 +341,7 @@ int cmd_send_pack(int argc,
>>  		/* stable plumbing output; do not modify or localize */
>>  		fprintf(stderr, "Everything up-to-date\n");
>>  
>> +cleanup:
>>  	string_list_clear(&push_options, 0);
>>  	free_refs(remote_refs);
>>  	free_refs(local_refs);
> 
> This made me wonder if the remote_refs out-parameter is valid after
> match_push_refs() returns failure (especially since we do not initialize
> it at the top of the function).
> 
> I think the answer is "yes"; it is both an in-parameter and an
> out-parameter, and will have been earlier set up via get_remote_heads().
> So even on the failure case, match_push_refs() will leave it untouched
> and it is still valid (and needs to be cleaned up).
>