On 7/10/2025 4:48 AM, Lidong Yan wrote:
> @@ -710,23 +709,26 @@ static void prepare_to_use_bloom_filter(struct rev_info *revs)
> if (!revs->pruning.pathspec.nr)
> return;
>
> - revs->bloom_keyvecs_nr = 1;
> - CALLOC_ARRAY(revs->bloom_keyvecs, 1);
> - pi = &revs->pruning.pathspec.items[0];
> + revs->bloom_keyvecs_nr = revs->pruning.pathspec.nr;
> + CALLOC_ARRAY(revs->bloom_keyvecs, revs->bloom_keyvecs_nr);
> + for (int i = 0; i < revs->pruning.pathspec.nr; i++) {
> + pi = &revs->pruning.pathspec.items[i];
>
> - /* remove single trailing slash from path, if needed */
> - if (pi->len > 0 && pi->match[pi->len - 1] == '/') {
> - path_alloc = xmemdupz(pi->match, pi->len - 1);
> - path = path_alloc;
> - } else
> - path = pi->match;
> + /* remove single trailing slash from path, if needed */
> + if (pi->len > 0 && pi->match[pi->len - 1] == '/') {
> + path_alloc = xmemdupz(pi->match, pi->len - 1);
> + path = path_alloc;
> + } else
> + path = pi->match;
>
> - len = strlen(path);
> - if (!len)
> - goto fail;
> + len = strlen(path);
> + if (!len)
> + goto fail;
>
> - revs->bloom_keyvecs[0] =
> - bloom_keyvec_new(path, len, revs->bloom_filter_settings);
> + revs->bloom_keyvecs[i] =
> + bloom_keyvec_new(path, len, revs->bloom_filter_settings);
> + FREE_AND_NULL(path_alloc);
> + }
This diff is still bigger than I was hoping, so I'm sending a couple
of patches that simplify this code movement. Feel free to ignore
them as being too nit-picky.
--- >8 ---
