From: Junio C Hamano Date: Sun, 02 Jun 2013 19:33:58 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] unpack-trees: plug a memory leak Message-ID: <7vfvx0nw7t.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> In-Reply-To: <1369915136-4248-4-git-send-email-felipe.contreras@gmail.com> Felipe Contreras writes: > Before overwriting the destination index, first let's discard it's > contents. > > Signed-off-by: Felipe Contreras > --- > 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);