From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.8 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 010771F46C for ; Sun, 12 Jan 2020 06:44:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1732307AbgALGoP (ORCPT ); Sun, 12 Jan 2020 01:44:15 -0500 Received: from mail-wr1-f66.google.com ([209.85.221.66]:39095 "EHLO mail-wr1-f66.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1732302AbgALGoP (ORCPT ); Sun, 12 Jan 2020 01:44:15 -0500 Received: by mail-wr1-f66.google.com with SMTP id y11so5493883wrt.6 for ; Sat, 11 Jan 2020 22:44:14 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=yBKeY+etNxLSH9hTk6wwVbc3xhqEcIN4cirYzm1YNPI=; b=TbEN+RCjGMwfjT3KQ50hp7HHXRDnRYeHq3z6FAp6CKXNyOSMvcUupDq88ZIW+pSs86 IkXGLQ0nCGMgZo026SaNZnHW1v/vevUSG8GmnGtRRZRVXaO72ag0Eu+kO7dohq5f59Os uLG1w7UXkjSLxvKhTnpKCggiWIW+bDcBVJsuLGUMLQOYEpeukzYiXjaavNQTB5WnKUch OJeRGm68ftHAaNRdSAH0vnbnn0n3HSwKzKqievy1CdeBCCFOYD3jf3hWc0KCqgJDU3XE jfN90gsiVMZPVuLtrc/M85D4KdR07FbWU6NXfu3QjIofYT/l6sd3sfbYB7F9sOOWmg1G iRbw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=yBKeY+etNxLSH9hTk6wwVbc3xhqEcIN4cirYzm1YNPI=; b=p7ZURiAQ2IUTD3RUWhUtjFSfFe+HAbwo7rsCT1g6d/KTF4xb+5WA/Zq64tD0UF+sXx dR5cgiUKxI7Vt7NZsuFfuKCzxE8tRfnDNfb9EHH1dkw7X9uG60IBtw+70CZG6zORsnjz zZCIB/97gDnkDfW9d51txREUlhkzVkYRvw0eMRVKSdmcUZPHx/IhgbCUpmEB7Z//HSOC e+5n1AZQ05xfRf4BdqCItF0myK+A5AJR8T5/sLQE3o/PU7TXUNQqcGLUqIrG/HneZoM8 PSiU9oFW1Ou3KB6rHYfqbfqWm+4tGcGyV8ZliGKTUv3H+zamHk1IRJS1K6KV1dbuyvfV FbRg== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAVnm4HOFYNS9Z03vyxHq5aHCM6ImekaUb4FMai3/xHtR4PXMGqm R2ddwyQcJPPDPhiUFgSiWzuA1AwPeuBLejFkE44= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzX6Pt64AlBBeSpzDow7LBuZ5pSAvOaPOi54ay1Yo7zuSG3dsLpM3vn+9LSp62u0SJUcKM06dmh87ibWuuaBDM= X-Received: by 2002:a5d:66c3:: with SMTP id k3mr11265924wrw.370.1578811453346; Sat, 11 Jan 2020 22:44:13 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20200111123533.1613844-1-marcandre.lureau@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: From: =?UTF-8?B?TWFyYy1BbmRyw6kgTHVyZWF1?= Date: Sun, 12 Jan 2020 10:44:01 +0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] branch: let '--edit-description' default to rebased branch during rebase To: Eric Sunshine Cc: Git List , =?UTF-8?Q?SZEDER_G=C3=A1bor?= Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Hi Eric On Sun, Jan 12, 2020 at 5:27 AM Eric Sunshine wro= te: > > On Sat, Jan 11, 2020 at 9:55 AM Marc-Andr=C3=A9 Lureau > wrote: > > On Sat, Jan 11, 2020 at 5:28 PM Eric Sunshine = wrote: > > > On Sat, Jan 11, 2020 at 7:36 AM wrote: > > > > + if (wt_status_check_rebase(NULL, &s= tate)) { > > > > + branch_name =3D state.branc= h; > > > > + } > > Taking a deeper look at the code, I'm wondering it would make more > sense to call wt_status_get_state(), which handles 'rebase' and > 'bisect'. Is there a reason that you limited this check to only > 'rebase'? No reason, I just didn't try it yet. Done, thanks > > > > > if (edit_branch_description(branch_name)) > > > > return 1; > > > > + > > > > + free(branch_name); > > > > > > That `return 1` just above this free() is leaking 'branch_name', isn'= t it? > > > > right, let's fix that too > > Looking at the code itself (rather than consulting only the patch), I > see that there are a couple more early returns leaking 'branch_name', > so they need to be handled, as well. I think I covered them now, sending v4. thanks --=20 Marc-Andr=C3=A9 Lureau