Re: [PATCH 00/24] revision.[ch]: add and use release_revisions()

From: Derrick Stolee <derrickstolee@github.com>
Date: Mar 9, 2022, 19:30 UTC
Message-ID: <94242ef8-2e68-1b77-a108-2ed3604741fa@github.com>
In-Reply-To: <77c8ef4b-5dce-401b-e703-cfa32e18c853@github.com>

On 3/9/2022 9:34 AM, Derrick Stolee wrote:

Show 20 quoted lines

> On 3/9/2022 8:16 AM, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:
>> == For Junio ==
>>
>> This has a trivially resolved conflict with Derrick Stolee's
>> aaf251cdc5c (revision: put object filter into struct rev_info,
>> 2022-03-08) currently in "seen" in builtin/rev-list.c.
>>
>> The resolution is to just keep the "goto cleanup" in place of "return
>> 0" in the conflicting lines, but to otherwise keep Derrick's version.
>>
>> It will pass with/without SANITIZE=leak when applied to both "master"
>> and "seen". I omitted one test change (described in a relevant commit
>> message) due to the latter not being true (no fault of "seen", just a
>> new leaking command being added to a test).
> 
> Since ds/partial-bundles will soon be updated in v4 to change the
> pointer added to struct rev_info, it is even more likely that there
> will be more important things to do with regards to clearing the
> memory of rev_infos based on that change. It might be better to wait
> for that update (coming soon) and then rebase directly on top.

I took a look at the series as it stands now and have a few nits here and there. Generally, things are pretty standard in this kind of series you've been working diligently on for a while.

The only thing I can recommend is to check that your leak-check statements are still true when reaching the end of the series, now that the filter member exists. Likely the tests that you are marking as leak-free do nothing with object filters, so they will still be true. Just something to keep in mind and maybe add a patch that recursively frees the contents of 'revs->filter' at the end.

Thanks, -Stolee