refs: release strbuf after use in check_refname_component()
PATCH 1/1 refs: release strbuf after use in check_refname_component()
--- refs.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
refs.c +1 -1
@@ -2334,7 +2334,7 @@ static struct ref_lock *lock_ref_sha1_basic(const char *refname,struct strbuf err =STRBUF_INIT ;unable_to_lock_message (ref_file, errno, &err);error ("%s" , err.buf); -strbuf_reset (&err); +strbuf_release (&err); goto error_return; } }
Signature · 1 line
2.2.1
Quoted 10 lines · René Scharfe
Signed-off-by Rene Scharfe <[email protected]>--- refs.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)refs.c +0
-0
refs.c static struct ref_lock *lock_ref_sha1_basic(const char *refname, · line 2340
Quoted 8 lines
refs.c +1
-1@@ -2334,7 +2334,7 @@ static struct ref_lock *lock_ref_sha1_basic(const char *refname,struct strbuf err =STRBUF_INIT ;unable_to_lock_message (ref_file, errno, &err);error ("%s" , err.buf); -strbuf_reset (&err); +strbuf_release (&err); goto error_return; } }
The subject does not seem to match what the patch is doing, but the patch is obviously correct ;-)
Quoted 7 lines · Junio C Hamano
Quoted 5 lines · René Scharfe
Signed-off-by Rene Scharfe <[email protected]>--- refs.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
Quoted 16 lines
refs.c static struct ref_lock *lock_ref_sha1_basic(const char *refname, · line 2340
Quoted 13 lines
refs.c +1
-1@@ -2334,7 +2334,7 @@ static struct ref_lock *lock_ref_sha1_basic(const char *refname,struct strbuf err =STRBUF_INIT ;unable_to_lock_message (ref_file, errno, &err);error ("%s" , err.buf); -strbuf_reset (&err); +strbuf_release (&err); goto error_return; } }The subject does not seem to match what the patch is doing, but the patch is obviously correct ;-)
The worst part of this is that I got it right in my hacked-up version:
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/259853
but then after much discussion, we dropped all of the lead-in patches, and I sent Ronnie's unedited:
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/259911
All that looking and I didn't notice the release/reset difference between our two versions. Sheesh.
Which is all a roundabout way of saying "yes, René's patch is obviously correct". :)
-Peff