On Wed, Feb 19, 2025 at 09:06:58PM +0800, shejialuo wrote: > On Wed, Feb 19, 2025 at 01:59:13PM +0100, Patrick Steinhardt wrote: > > Regarding the question why to even rename `ref_iterator_abort()` itself: > > this is done to avoid confusion going forward. Previously it really only > > had to be called when you actually wanted to abort an ongoing iteration > > over its yielded references. This is not the case anymore, and now you > > have to call it unconditionally after you're done with the iterator. So > > while the naming previously made sense, now it doesn't anymore. > > > > Good point, I didn't realise this part. Thanks for the detailed > explanation. I will continue to review the later patches. However, I > won't touch the oid part, because I am not familiar with this. By the > way, I think we miss out one thing in this patch: > > We forget to free the dir iterator defined in the > "files-backend.c::files_fsck_refs_dir". I have just remembered that I > use dir iterator when checking the ref consistency. Hm, good point. Why doesn't CI complain about this leak...? I'll investigate, thanks for the hint! Patrick
