Martin Ågren 0fa5a2ed8d lock_file: move static locks into functions ...

Placing `struct lock_file`s on the stack used to be a bad idea, because
the temp- and lockfile-machinery would keep a pointer into the struct.
But after 076aa2cbd (tempfile: auto-allocate tempfiles on heap,
2017-09-05), we can safely have lockfiles on the stack. (This applies
even if a user returns early, leaving a locked lock behind.)

Each of these `struct lock_file`s is used from within a single function.
Move them into the respective functions to make the scope clearer and
drop the staticness.

For good measure, I have inspected these sites and come to believe that
they always release the lock, with the possible exception of bailing out
using `die()` or `exit()` or by returning from a `cmd_foo()`.

As pointed out by Jeff King, it would be bad if someone held on to a
`struct lock_file *` for some reason. After some grepping, I agree with
his findings: no-one appears to be doing that.

After this commit, the remaining occurrences of "static struct
lock_file" are locks that are used from within different functions. That
is, they need to remain static. (Short of more intrusive changes like
passing around pointers to non-static locks.)

Signed-off-by: Martin Ågren <martin.agren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>

2018-05-10 14:55:40 +09:00

7.4 KiB

Raw Blame History

View Raw