From: Junio C Hamano Date: Mon, 22 Feb 2016 23:08:01 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] Correct conditions to free textconv result data Message-ID: In-Reply-To: Duy Nguyen writes: > On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 1:12 AM, Jeff King wrote: >> 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. While reading Peff's clarification patch, I did find the assignment of "" to the *out pointer disturbing. That part of your patch (I presume that is what you mean by the above) may want to be revived. Thanks.