Re: (patch) calloc->xaclloc in read-cache.c

iler.ml@gmail.com· May 9, 2006, 16:14 UTC · lore

How about this.

--- read-cache.c.000 2006-05-09 15:27:56.000000000 +0000 +++ read-cache.c 2006-05-09 15:28:10.000000000 +0000

@@ -552,7 +552,7 @@
 
 	active_nr = ntohl(hdr->hdr_entries);
 	active_alloc = alloc_nr(active_nr);
-	active_cache = calloc(active_alloc, sizeof(struct cache_entry *));
+	active_cache = xcalloc(active_alloc, sizeof(struct cache_entry *));
 
 	offset = sizeof(*hdr);
 	for (i = 0; i < active_nr; i++) {

Junio C Hamano· May 9, 2006, 13:26 UTC · re: iler.ml@gmail.com · lore

iler.ml@gmail.com writes:

> How about this.

Looks good, thanks. If you needed some MUA trick that other people might benefit from please feel free to send a patch to Documentation/SubmittingPatches "MUA specific hints" section.

Except "Subject: [PATCH] blah", commit log message (in this case what you would have on the Subject line is to the point and you would not need any extra log message), "Signed-off-by: whom", and perhaps "---\n". Material that you do not want to have in the final commit message, like "How about this" and diffstat if you have one, would come after the "---\n" line.

Your message formatted in the preferred way becomes like this:

	Subject: [PATCH] read-cache.c: use xcalloc() not calloc()

	Elsewhere we use xcalloc(); we should consistently do so.

        Signed-off-by: Yakov Lerner <iler.ml@gmail.com>
	---

        * How about this?

         read-cache.c |    2 +-
         1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)

        --- read-cache.c.000	2006-05-09 15:27:56.000000000 +0000
        +++ read-cache.c	2006-05-09 15:28:10.000000000 +0000
        @@ -552,7 +552,7 @@

                active_nr = ntohl(hdr->hdr_entries);
	...