Re: [PATCH nd/split-index] fixup! read-cache: new API write_locked_index instead of write_index/write_cache

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

On 01/06/14 01:47, Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy <pclouds@gmail.com>
> ---
>  I intended it resend the series after the comments I received, but it
>  looks like Junio has picked up all comments except this one, so
>  here's the fix.
> 
>  sequencer.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/sequencer.c b/sequencer.c
> index 377c877..4b709db 100644
> --- a/sequencer.c
> +++ b/sequencer.c
> @@ -672,7 +672,7 @@ static void prepare_revs(struct replay_opts *opts)
>  static void read_and_refresh_cache(struct replay_opts *opts)
>  {
>  	static struct lock_file index_lock;
> -	hold_locked_index(&index_lock, 0);
> +	int index_fd = hold_locked_index(&index_lock, 0);
>  	if (read_index_preload(&the_index, NULL) < 0)
>  		die(_("git %s: failed to read the index"), action_name(opts));
>  	refresh_index(&the_index, REFRESH_QUIET|REFRESH_UNMERGED, NULL, NULL, NULL);
> 

Yep, this silences sparse. I would have declared the variable to be
(say) fd (and changed the _use_ site as well, of course!), rather
than once again hiding the index_fd() global function. However, this
is perfectly fine as-is.

The actual culprit is the index_fd() global function, but renaming it
now is probably not worth the code churn (and I'm lazy). ;-)

Thanks!

ATB,
Ramsay Jones