Re: [PATCH 1/3] http-push: avoid invalid memory accesses

[Mike Hommey <mh@glandium.org>]

On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 11:23:46PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> writes:
> 
> > Before objects are sent, the respective ref is locked.  However,
> > without this patch, the lock is lifted before the last object for
> > that ref was sent.  As a consequence, the lock data was accessed
> > after the lock structure was free()d.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
> > ---
> >  http-push.c |    5 ++++-
> >  1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/http-push.c b/http-push.c
> > index b2b410d..7a6c669 100644
> > --- a/http-push.c
> > +++ b/http-push.c
> > @@ -2398,7 +2398,10 @@ int main(int argc, char **argv)
> >  		fill_active_slots();
> >  		add_fill_function(NULL, fill_active_slot);
> >  #endif
> > -		finish_all_active_slots();
> > +		do {
> > +			finish_all_active_slots();
> #ifdef CURL_MULTI
> > +			fill_active_slots();
> #endif
> > +		} while (request_queue_head && !aborted);
> >  
> >  		/* Update the remote branch if all went well */
> >  		if (aborted || !update_remote(ref->new_sha1, ref_lock)) {
> > -- 
> > 1.5.4.1.1353.g0d5dd
> 
> I wonder if we should define a no-op function fill_active_slots()
> for non MULTI case...

Or a #define... but all this slot thing is probably going to change
anyway, when I'll be done with it (but this is not planned for tomorrow).

Mike