From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
To: "SZEDER Gábor" <szeder.dev@gmail.com>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: fsck segfault
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2022 12:39:16 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <xmqqo7xvo2vv.fsf@gitster.g> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20220711081956.GB2038@szeder.dev> ("SZEDER Gábor"'s message of "Mon, 11 Jul 2022 10:19:56 +0200")
SZEDER Gábor <szeder.dev@gmail.com> writes:
>> + for (i = 0; i < 3; i++) {
>> + struct object *obj;
>> +
>> + if (!ru->mode[i] || !S_ISREG(ru->mode[i]))
>> + continue;
>> +
>> + obj = parse_object(the_repository, &ru->oid[i]);
>
> parse_object() can return NULL ...
>
>> + if (!obj) {
>
> ... and here is the if statement to show an error in that case ...
>
>> + error(_("%s: invalid sha1 pointer in resolve-undo"),
>> + oid_to_hex(&ru->oid[i]));
>> + errors_found |= ERROR_REFS;
>> + }
>> + obj->flags |= USED;
>
> ... but then there is this line which might dereference that NULL
> pointer.
>
> Perhaps all we would need is a 'continue' at the end of that 'if
> (!obj)' block, or an else block for the last three statements, which
> should result in the same control flow? Dunno.
Thanks for spotting. Looking at how fsck_cache_tree() and
fsck_walk_tree() handles missing object, it sounds like the right
approach to continue after setting the errors_found bit.
>> + fsck_put_object_name(&fsck_walk_options, &ru->oid[i],
>> + ":(%d):%s", i, path);
>> + mark_object_reachable(obj);
>> + }
>> + }
>> + return 0;
>> +}
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-07-11 19:39 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-06-09 23:44 [PATCH] revision: mark blobs needed for resolve-undo as reachable Junio C Hamano
2022-06-13 15:15 ` Derrick Stolee
2022-06-13 20:11 ` Junio C Hamano
2022-06-14 0:24 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2022-06-14 14:35 ` Derrick Stolee
2022-06-15 2:02 ` Taylor Blau
2022-06-15 3:48 ` Jeff King
2022-06-15 20:47 ` Taylor Blau
2022-06-15 17:11 ` Junio C Hamano
2022-06-16 14:10 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2022-06-14 2:49 ` Taylor Blau
2022-07-11 8:19 ` fsck segfault (was: Re: [PATCH] revision: mark blobs needed for resolve-undo as reachable) SZEDER Gábor
2022-07-11 19:39 ` Junio C Hamano [this message]
2022-07-11 23:25 ` [PATCH 2/1] fsck: do not dereference NULL while checking resolve-undo data Junio C Hamano
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=xmqqo7xvo2vv.fsf@gitster.g \
--to=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=szeder.dev@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.