On Sat, Mar 3, 2018 at 6:36 AM, Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy <pclo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Free the memory and reset alt_odb_{list, tail} to NULL.
>
> Signed-off-by: Stefan Beller <sbel...@google.com>
> Signed-off-by: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy <pclo...@gmail.com>
> ---
> diff --git a/object.c b/object.c
> @@ -450,8 +450,26 @@ void raw_object_store_init(struct raw_object_store *o)
> +static void free_alt_odb(struct alternate_object_database *alt)
> +{
> + strbuf_release(&alt->scratch);
> + oid_array_clear(&alt->loose_objects_cache);
> +}
This doesn't free the 'struct alternate_object_database' entry itself, right?
Is that intentional? Isn't the idea that this should free the entries too?
> +static void free_alt_odbs(struct raw_object_store *o)
> +{
> + while (o->alt_odb_list) {
> + free_alt_odb(o->alt_odb_list);
> + o->alt_odb_list = o->alt_odb_list->next;
> + }
> +}
Accessing an entry's 'next' member after invoking free_alt_odb() works
because the entry itself hasn't been freed (as noted above).
Is leaking the entries themselves intentional?
> void raw_object_store_clear(struct raw_object_store *o)
> {
> FREE_AND_NULL(o->objectdir);
> FREE_AND_NULL(o->alternate_db);
> +
> + free_alt_odbs(o);
> + o->alt_odb_tail = NULL;
> }
The commit message talks about freeing memory and resetting
alt_odb_list and alt_odb_tail, but this code only resets alt_odb_tail.
