Re: [PATCH 3/3] Correct conditions to free textconv result data
- From
Duy Nguyen <pclouds@gmail.com>
- Date
- Feb 22, 2016, 23:03 UTC
- Message-ID
- <CACsJy8BWgDFq_Dv=omkpDBa_pUF7zKr9cFftNL-KxtMcTkc5-w@mail.gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <20160222181224.GA4917@sigill.intra.peff.net>
On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 1:12 AM, Jeff King <peff@peff.net> wrote:
Show 8 quoted lines
> On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 01:06:46PM -0500, Jeff King wrote: > >> Is there a case I'm missing here where we actually leak memory or try to >> free non-allocated memory? I didn't see it. > > By the way, I saw only patches 2/3 and 3/3 on the list. So maybe there > is something interesting going on in 1/3, or in a cover letter that > didn't make it. :)
The only thing common in this series is it's the result of -Wwrite-strings. 1/3 changes some "char *" to "const char *", you don't miss anything.
-- Duy