Re: [PATCH v2 1/8] hook: add internal state alloc/free callbacks
- From
Adrian Ratiu <adrian.ratiu@collabora.com>
- Date
- Feb 20, 2026, 13:40 UTC
- Message-ID
- <87342vy1m9.fsf@gentoo.mail-host-address-is-not-set>
- In-Reply-To
- <aZhXh6aqlY0VMgEG@pks.im>
On Fri, 20 Feb 2026, Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im> wrote:
Show 16 quoted lines
> On Thu, Feb 19, 2026 at 12:23:45AM +0200, Adrian Ratiu wrote:
>> diff --git a/builtin/receive-pack.c b/builtin/receive-pack.c
>> index 2d2b33d73d..f23772bc56 100644
>> --- a/builtin/receive-pack.c
>> +++ b/builtin/receive-pack.c
>> @@ -901,6 +901,26 @@ static int feed_receive_hook_cb(int hook_stdin_fd, void *pp_cb UNUSED, void *pp_
>> return state->cmd ? 0 : 1; /* 0 = more to come, 1 = EOF */
>> }
>>
>> +static void *receive_hook_feed_state_alloc(void *feed_pipe_ctx)
>> +{
>> + struct receive_hook_feed_state *init_state = feed_pipe_ctx;
>> + struct receive_hook_feed_state *data = xcalloc(1, sizeof(*data));
>
> Tiny nit, not worth addressing: we often use `CALLOC_ARRAY(data, 1)`
> nowadays.I'll fix this since I'm planning to do a v3 anyway. Thanks for the pointer.
Show 16 quoted lines
> >> + data->report = init_state->report; >> + data->cmd = init_state->cmd; >> + data->skip_broken = init_state->skip_broken; >> + strbuf_init(&data->buf, 0); >> + return data; >> +} > > Okay, this basically creates the new instance by creating a deep copy of > the "template" structure. > > One could split this up so that we have a "configuration" struct and a > "data" struct, where we then provide a pointer to the configuration into > the data structure, as only the buffer needs to change between the > individual hook invocations. That would avoid some copying around, but > it feels a bit unnecessary.
Yes, I also thought about this and reached the same conclusion.
Show 13 quoted lines
>
>> +static void receive_hook_feed_state_free(void *data)
>> +{
>> + struct receive_hook_feed_state *d = data;
>> + if (!d)
>> + return;
>> + strbuf_release(&d->buf);
>> + free(d);
>> +}
>
> I would expect that the hook interfaces know to not call `free()` in
> case `alloc()` wasn't called, but I guess it doesn't hurt to be
> defensive here anyway.Agreed.
Show 29 quoted lines
>> @@ -908,7 +928,7 @@ static int run_receive_hook(struct command *commands,
>> {
>> struct run_hooks_opt opt = RUN_HOOKS_OPT_INIT;
>> struct command *iter = commands;
>> - struct receive_hook_feed_state feed_state;
>> + struct receive_hook_feed_state feed_init_state = { 0 };
>> struct async sideband_async;
>> int sideband_async_started = 0;
>> int saved_stderr = -1;
>> @@ -938,16 +958,15 @@ static int run_receive_hook(struct command *commands,
>> prepare_sideband_async(&sideband_async, &saved_stderr, &sideband_async_started);
>>
>> /* set up stdin callback */
>> - feed_state.cmd = commands;
>> - feed_state.skip_broken = skip_broken;
>> - feed_state.report = NULL;
>> - strbuf_init(&feed_state.buf, 0);
>> - opt.feed_pipe_cb_data = &feed_state;
>> + feed_init_state.cmd = commands;
>> + feed_init_state.skip_broken = skip_broken;
>
> As far as I can see all of the data that we pass to the state struct is
> static, so we might just as well initialize it right away, right?
>
> struct receive_hook_feed_state feed_init_state = {
> .cmd = commands,
> .skip_broken = skip_broken,
> .buf = STRBUF_INIT,
> };I missed this. Thanks. Will do in v3.
Show 17 quoted lines
>> diff --git a/hook.c b/hook.c
>> index cde7198412..83ff658866 100644
>> --- a/hook.c
>> +++ b/hook.c
>> @@ -133,6 +133,8 @@ static int notify_hook_finished(int result,
>>
>> static void run_hooks_opt_clear(struct run_hooks_opt *options)
>> {
>> + if (options->feed_pipe_cb_data_free)
>> + options->feed_pipe_cb_data_free(options->feed_pipe_cb_data);
>> strvec_clear(&options->env);
>> strvec_clear(&options->args);
>> }
>
> I guess this here would be where we could skip `free` in case the data
> wasn't even allocated. But as I said further up, I don't care all that
> much.That is correct. I think I'll just drop that pointer check anyway in v3.
Show 18 quoted lines
>> diff --git a/hook.h b/hook.h
>> index 20eb56fd63..a6bdc6f90f 100644
>> --- a/hook.h
>> +++ b/hook.h
>> @@ -5,6 +5,9 @@
>>
>> struct repository;
>>
>> +typedef void (*cb_data_free_fn)(void *data);
>> +typedef void *(*cb_data_alloc_fn)(void *init_ctx);
>> +
>> struct run_hooks_opt
>> {
>> /* Environment vars to be set for each hook */
>
> Do we maybe want to scope these function typedefs to the hooks subsystem
> by calling the `hook_data_free_fn` and `hook_data_alloc_fn`, or
> something like that?Good idea. I'll rename them in v3.