Re: [PATCH 3/4] unpack-trees: plug a memory leak

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Jun 2, 2013, 19:33 UTC
Message-ID: <7vfvx0nw7t.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
In-Reply-To: <1369915136-4248-4-git-send-email-felipe.contreras@gmail.com>

Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com> writes:

Show 21 quoted lines

> Before overwriting the destination index, first let's discard it's
> contents.
>
> Signed-off-by: Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com>
> ---
>  unpack-trees.c | 4 +++-
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/unpack-trees.c b/unpack-trees.c
> index ede4299..eff2944 100644
> --- a/unpack-trees.c
> +++ b/unpack-trees.c
> @@ -1146,8 +1146,10 @@ int unpack_trees(unsigned len, struct tree_desc *t, struct unpack_trees_options
>  
>  	o->src_index = NULL;
>  	ret = check_updates(o) ? (-2) : 0;
> -	if (o->dst_index)
> +	if (o->dst_index) {
> +		discard_index(o->dst_index);
>  		*o->dst_index = o->result;
> +	}

I seem to recall that many callers set src_index and dst_index to the same istate, and expect that the original istate pointed by the src_index to remain usable. Is it safe to discard it like this at this point?

>  
>  done:
>  	clear_exclude_list(&el);