Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] merge: fix cache_entry use-after-free

From: Junio C Hamano <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 2015 15:28:07 -0700

David Turner <[email-masked]> writes:

> From: Keith McGuigan <[email-masked]>
>
> During merges, we would previously free entries that we no longer need
> in the destination index.  But those entries might also be stored in
> the dir_entry cache, and when a later call to add_to_index found them,
> they would be used after being freed.
>
> To prevent this, add a ref count for struct cache_entry.  Whenever
> a cache entry is added to a data structure, the ref count is incremented;
> when it is removed from the data structure, it is decremented.  When
> it hits zero, the cache_entry is freed.
>
> Signed-off-by: Keith McGuigan <[email-masked]>
> ---

I'll forge your "messenger's sign-off" here ;-)

> diff --git a/unpack-trees.c b/unpack-trees.c
> index f932e80..1a0a637 100644
> --- a/unpack-trees.c
> +++ b/unpack-trees.c
> @@ -606,8 +606,10 @@ static int unpack_nondirectories(int n, unsigned long mask,
>  					o);
>  		for (i = 0; i < n; i++) {
>  			struct cache_entry *ce = src[i + o->merge];
> -			if (ce != o->df_conflict_entry)
> -				free(ce);
> +			if (ce != o->df_conflict_entry) {
> +				drop_ce_ref(ce);
> +				src[i + o->merge] = NULL;
> +			}

This one smelled iffy.  I think it is safe because the caller does
not look at src[] other than src[0] after this function returns, and
this setting to NULL happens only when o->merge is set to 1, so I do
not think this is buggy, but at the same time I do not think setting
to NULL is necessary.

Other than that, looks nice.  Thanks.