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.