Re: [PATCH 6/7] reftable/record: use scratch buffer when decoding records

[Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1370 bytes --]

On Mon, Mar 11, 2024 at 12:31:57PM -0700, Josh Steadmon wrote:
> On 2024.03.05 13:11, Patrick Steinhardt wrote:
[snip]
> > diff --git a/reftable/record.c b/reftable/record.c
> > index 7c86877586..060244337f 100644
> > --- a/reftable/record.c
> > +++ b/reftable/record.c
> > @@ -374,7 +374,7 @@ static int reftable_ref_record_encode(const void *rec, struct string_view s,
> >  
> >  static int reftable_ref_record_decode(void *rec, struct strbuf key,
> >  				      uint8_t val_type, struct string_view in,
> > -				      int hash_size)
> > +				      int hash_size, struct strbuf *scratch)
> >  {
> >  	struct reftable_ref_record *r = rec;
> >  	struct string_view start = in;
> > @@ -425,13 +425,12 @@ static int reftable_ref_record_decode(void *rec, struct strbuf key,
> >  		break;
> >  
> >  	case REFTABLE_REF_SYMREF: {
> > -		struct strbuf dest = STRBUF_INIT;
> > -		int n = decode_string(&dest, in);
> > +		int n = decode_string(scratch, in);
> >  		if (n < 0) {
> >  			return -1;
> >  		}
> >  		string_view_consume(&in, n);
> > -		r->value.symref = dest.buf;
> > +		r->value.symref = strbuf_detach(scratch, NULL);
> >  	} break;
> 
> I had to dig into this to convince myself that we aren't leaking memory
> here, but IIUC this gets cleaned up eventually by
> reftable_ref_record_release(), right?

Yes, exactly.

Patrick

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]