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 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).