split index: sparse warning

[Ramsay Jones <ramsay@ramsay1.demon.co.uk>]

Hi Duy,

I haven't looked at your split-index series at all. However, sparse has
nagged me to take a quick squint at the result of the series as it
appears in the 'pu' branch.

In particular, sparse complains thus:

      SP sequencer.c
  sequencer.c:690:49: error: incompatible types for operation (>=)
  sequencer.c:690:49:    left side has type int ( extern [toplevel] *<noident> )( ... )
  sequencer.c:690:49:    right side has type int

... which is fair enough; index_fd is, indeed, a function (pointer) and
not an int file descriptor! The offending code looks like:

683 static void read_and_refresh_cache(struct replay_opts *opts)
684 {
685         static struct lock_file index_lock;
686         hold_locked_index(&index_lock, 0);
687         if (read_index_preload(&the_index, NULL) < 0)
688                 die(_("git %s: failed to read the index"), action_name(opts));
689         refresh_index(&the_index, REFRESH_QUIET|REFRESH_UNMERGED, NULL, NULL, NULL);
690         if (the_index.cache_changed && index_fd >= 0) {
691                 if (write_locked_index(&the_index, &index_lock, COMMIT_LOCK))
692                         die(_("git %s: failed to refresh the index"), action_name(opts));
693         }
694         rollback_lock_file(&index_lock);
695 }


It seems that, in an earlier commit (33c297aa), index_fd was declared
as a local int variable (hiding the global function) which was then
initialised by a call to hold_locked_index().

I assume that the conditional should be changed to something like:

690         if (the_index.cache_changed && index_lock.fd >= 0) {

... but I haven't spent any time investigating this, so take this
suggestion which a large pinch of salt! :-P

ATB,
Ramsay Jones