Taylor Blau <me@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > On Tue, May 20, 2025 at 09:23:09AM +0000, Taylor Blau via GitGitGadget wrote: >> Signed-off-by: Taylor Blau <me@xxxxxxxxxxxx> > > This commit forges my Signed-off-by, but I am happy with the result > here. > > I do think the series is structured a little awkwardly as a result of > adding this patch to it. That this and the previous patch have the > subject "pack-bitmap: fix memory leak if `load_bitmap_entries_v1` > failed" make the series not quite as clear as it could be. > > I think there are a couple of things going on: > > - This patch is a bug fix that could be applied independently of the > first one. The rationale there would be that we shouldn't be leaking > the EWAH bitmaps in 'b->bitmaps', but we are as a result of NULL'ing > the pointer in the "failed" label. That patch can stand alone. > > - The first patch (yours) is no longer fixing a leak, at least after > this patch. But it does delay reading the bitmap until we have > validated its XOR offset for sanity, which is a good thing mostly > from a performance perspective. > > I would probably swap the two patches around so that yours applies on > top of mine, and then rewords the patch message in yours to reflect that > it is no longer fixing a leak. Sounds like a plausible structure.
