Re: [PATCH v4 15/27] fast-import.c: change update_branch to use ref transactions
- From
Ronnie Sahlberg <sahlberg@google.com>
- Date
- Apr 29, 2014, 16:57 UTC
- Message-ID
- <CAL=YDWkD+0=Cy5wjAUtVn8QNtVr3NSaUkRoEnC+QcdRhYG59vA@mail.gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <CAPig+cTE9+XHYfnynMykbYf=0kMivj5wFu0Lovnr8XbxyEpsyA@mail.gmail.com>
On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 7:18 PM, Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com> wrote:
Show 61 quoted lines
> On Mon, Apr 28, 2014 at 6:54 PM, Ronnie Sahlberg <sahlberg@google.com> wrote:
>> Change update_branch() to use ref transactions for updates.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Ronnie Sahlberg <sahlberg@google.com>
>> ---
>> fast-import.c | 20 ++++++++++++--------
>> 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/fast-import.c b/fast-import.c
>> index fb4738d..300c8dc 100644
>> --- a/fast-import.c
>> +++ b/fast-import.c
>> @@ -1678,36 +1678,40 @@ found_entry:
>> static int update_branch(struct branch *b)
>> {
>> static const char *msg = "fast-import";
>> - struct ref_lock *lock;
>> + struct ref_transaction *transaction;
>> unsigned char old_sha1[20];
>> + struct strbuf err = STRBUF_INIT;
>>
>> if (is_null_sha1(b->sha1))
>> return 0;
>> if (read_ref(b->name, old_sha1))
>> hashclr(old_sha1);
>> - lock = lock_any_ref_for_update(b->name, old_sha1, 0, NULL);
>> - if (!lock)
>> - return error("Unable to lock %s", b->name);
>> if (!force_update && !is_null_sha1(old_sha1)) {
>> struct commit *old_cmit, *new_cmit;
>>
>> old_cmit = lookup_commit_reference_gently(old_sha1, 0);
>> new_cmit = lookup_commit_reference_gently(b->sha1, 0);
>> if (!old_cmit || !new_cmit) {
>> - unlock_ref(lock);
>> return error("Branch %s is missing commits.", b->name);
>> }
>>
>> if (!in_merge_bases(old_cmit, new_cmit)) {
>> - unlock_ref(lock);
>> warning("Not updating %s"
>> " (new tip %s does not contain %s)",
>> b->name, sha1_to_hex(b->sha1), sha1_to_hex(old_sha1));
>> return -1;
>> }
>> }
>> - if (write_ref_sha1(lock, b->sha1, msg) < 0)
>> - return error("Unable to update %s", b->name);
>> + transaction = ref_transaction_begin();
>> + if ((!transaction ||
>> + ref_transaction_update(transaction, b->name, b->sha1, old_sha1,
>> + 0, 1)) ||
>> + (ref_transaction_commit(transaction, msg, &err) &&
>> + !(transaction = NULL))) {
>> + ref_transaction_rollback(transaction);
>> + return error("Unable to update branch %s: %s", b->name,
>> + strbuf_detach(&err, NULL));
>
> Iffy strbuf handling. The strbuf content is being leaked here whether
> detached or not.
>Thanks!
I have updated this and all other patches to make sure we do a strbuf_release() any time we have added to the string.
I also did a quick audit of the strbuf_detach() use in builtin/* (which I based my use on) and there seems to be quite common that strbuf_detach() is used in a way that will leak memory.
I will make a note and perhaps audit all the other strbuf_detach() calls for a future patch series.
Show 6 quoted lines
>> + } >> return 0; >> } >> >> -- >> 1.9.1.528.g98b8868.dirty