Re: Fix incorrect const qualification for tbm_add_tuples() and itemptr_to_uint64()
Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org>
From: Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org>
To: Chao Li <li.evan.chao@gmail.com>,
Postgres hackers <pgsql-hackers@lists.postgresql.org>
Date: 2025-10-30T10:31:42Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On 29.10.25 04:11, Chao Li wrote: > I noticed a wrong const qualification: > ``` > void > tbm_add_tuples(TIDBitmap *tbm, const ItemPointer tids, int ntids, > bool recheck) > ``` > > This "const" only protects "tids" itself from updating, which is > meaningless. I believe the real intention should be protecting the > content "tids" pointing to from updating. > > This behavior can be easily proved by the compiler. If we add a line of > fake code in the function: > ``` > tids[0].ip_posid = 0; > ``` > > With current "const ItemPointer tids", the compiler won't report any > problem. If we change to "const ItemPointerData *tids", the compiler > will raise an error due to the assignment to read-only variable. > > I searched over the source tree, and found only one more occurrence in > itemptr_to_uint64(), so I fixed it as well. I have committed this, and I also found a few more similarly confused cases across the tree, which I also fixed. > Also, as I am touching tbm_add_tuples(), I did a tiny change that moved > the loop variable "i" into "for". Peter Eisentraut just did the same > change in formatting.c [1]. I don't know, let's leave unrelated changes for a separate patch.
Commits
-
Fix some confusing uses of const
- 8ce795fcb70d 19 (unreleased) landed
-
formatting.c cleanup: Move loop variables definitions into for statement
- 03fbb0814c50 19 (unreleased) cited