On Tue, May 06, 2025 at 09:40:55AM +0200, Christian Couder wrote:
> On Mon, May 5, 2025 at 10:52 AM Patrick Steinhardt <ps@xxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > +static int worktree_prune_condition(struct gc_config *cfg)
> > +{
> > + struct strvec worktrees = STRVEC_INIT;
> > + struct strbuf reason = STRBUF_INIT;
> > + timestamp_t expiry_date;
> > + int should_prune = 0;
> > + int limit = 1;
> > +
> > + git_config_get_int("maintenance.worktree-prune.auto", &limit);
> > + if (limit <= 0) {
> > + should_prune = limit < 0;
> > + goto out;
> > + }
> > +
> > + if (parse_expiry_date(cfg->prune_worktrees_expire, &expiry_date) ||
> > + get_worktree_names(the_repository, &worktrees) < 0)
> > + goto out;
> > +
> > + for (size_t i = 0; i < worktrees.nr; i++) {
> > + char *wtpath;
> > +
> > + strbuf_reset(&reason);
> > + if (should_prune_worktree(worktrees.v[i], &reason, &wtpath, expiry_date)) {
> > + limit--;
> > +
> > + if (!limit) {
> > + should_prune = 1;
> > + goto out;
>
> Eric noticed in a previous round that wtpath is leaked in this `goto
> out` path, and it seems to me that it's still the case.
Yeah, our mails had crossed back then. Fixed now.
Patrick
