On Wed, Aug 07, 2013 at 10:17:57AM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote: > And isn't it still a mistake? I think it used to be that subvol_uuid_search_init() > would allocate the memory which must be freed, but that's no longer the case, > right? So under what circumstances is it correct to call > subvol_uuid_search_add() which frees those pointers? Looks like the memory management is internal to the subvol_uuid* functions, now _init does not allocate and I don't see why _add should call free. All users of subvol_uuid_search() free the memory themselves (in current code). Seems that subvol_uuid_search_add was exported without any concern that it could be part of the library interface. We don't have library ABI versioning in place, so I suggest to keep the function there for compatibility with current code (though I'm not aware of any external users of the _add function), but drop th free() calls and put a "don't use" comment. david -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
