From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
To: "René Scharfe" <l.s.r@web.de>
Cc: "Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason" <avarab@gmail.com>,
"Git List" <git@vger.kernel.org>,
"Junio C Hamano" <gitster@pobox.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] am: don't pass strvec to apply_parse_options()
Date: Sat, 17 Dec 2022 16:53:50 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Y546bgdvYIkfwTlv@coredump.intra.peff.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <91c5120d-bbd4-8aa5-a205-d1f5387a7f19@web.de>
On Sat, Dec 17, 2022 at 05:07:12PM +0100, René Scharfe wrote:
> > If we are just re-ordering argv, though, it feels like this could still
> > work with a strvec. Right now a strvec with "nr" items will free items 0
> > through nr-1, assuming that v[nr] is its NULL invariant. But it could
> > free v[nr], too, in case the NULL was swapped into an earlier position.
> >
> > It's a little weird already, because that swap has violated the
> > invariant, so trying to strvec_push() onto it would cause confusing
> > results. But if the general use case is to pass the strvec to
> > parse_options(), get reordered, and then clear() it, it should work. If
> > you wanted to get really fancy, push() et al could double-check the
> > invariant and BUG().
>
> Yes, parse_options() and strvec are not fitting perfectly. Changing the
> former to reorder the elements and keeping them all would require
> checking that all callers use the return value. Feels like a lot of work.
I think we're already munging the strvec arrays in the option parser,
though. I'm just suggesting that parse_options() swap arguments to the
end instead of overwriting a NULL (actually, I'm not even sure it
doesn't do that already), and strvec_clear() checking the final element.
The end state is not necessarily safe, but it's no worse than what we
have today.
That said...
> A variant that takes a strvec and removes and frees parsed items from it
> would be clean, but would require refactoring indirect callers like
> apply_parse_options() users. Busywork.
>
> Making a shallow copy to give to parse_options() in callers that currently
> pass a strvec directly or indirectly seems like the simplest solution to
> me for now.
Yes, I thought your original patch actually got to the root of the
problem. strvec owns the array and its elements, and parse-options wants
to munge the array itself (but not the elements). Making a shallow copy
is eliminates the conflict over ownership.
-Peff
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-12-17 21:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2022-12-13 6:47 [PATCH] am: don't pass strvec to apply_parse_options() René Scharfe
2022-12-13 8:37 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2022-12-13 18:31 ` René Scharfe
2022-12-14 8:44 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2022-12-15 9:11 ` [RFC PATCH 0/5] strvec: add a "nodup" mode, fix memory leaks Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2022-12-15 9:11 ` [RFC PATCH 1/5] builtin/annotate.c: simplify for strvec API Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2022-12-17 12:45 ` René Scharfe
2022-12-15 9:11 ` [RFC PATCH 2/5] various: add missing strvec_clear() Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2022-12-15 9:11 ` [RFC PATCH 3/5] strvec API: add a "STRVEC_INIT_NODUP" Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2022-12-17 12:45 ` René Scharfe
2022-12-15 9:11 ` [RFC PATCH 4/5] strvec API users: fix leaks by using "STRVEC_INIT_NODUP" Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2022-12-17 12:45 ` René Scharfe
2022-12-15 9:11 ` [RFC PATCH 5/5] strvec API users: fix more " Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2022-12-17 12:45 ` René Scharfe
2022-12-17 12:45 ` [RFC PATCH 0/5] strvec: add a "nodup" mode, fix memory leaks René Scharfe
2022-12-17 13:13 ` Jeff King
2022-12-19 9:20 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2023-01-07 13:21 ` Jeff King
2022-12-17 12:46 ` [PATCH] am: don't pass strvec to apply_parse_options() René Scharfe
2022-12-17 13:24 ` Jeff King
2022-12-17 16:07 ` René Scharfe
2022-12-17 21:53 ` Jeff King [this message]
2022-12-18 2:42 ` Junio C Hamano
2022-12-20 1:29 ` 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=Y546bgdvYIkfwTlv@coredump.intra.peff.net \
--to=peff@peff.net \
--cc=avarab@gmail.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=l.s.r@web.de \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).