[PATCH] git-apply doesn't handle same name patches well [V2]
- From
- Don Zickus <dzickus@redhat.com>
- Date
- Jun 16, 2008, 16:24 UTC
- Message-ID
- <1213633441-29185-1-git-send-email-dzickus@redhat.com>
When working with a lot of people who backport patches all day long, every once in a while I get a patch that modifies the same file more than once inside the same patch. git-apply either fails if the second change relies on the first change or silently drops the first change if the second change is independent.
The silent part is the scary scenario for us. Also this behaviour is different from the patch-utils.
I have modified git-apply to cache the filenames of files it modifies such that if a later patch chunk modifies a file in the cache it will buffer the previously changed file instead of reading the original file from disk.
Logic has been put in to handle creations/deletions/renames/copies. All the relevant tests of git-apply succeed.
A new test has been added to cover the cases I addressed. However, currently adding changes to renamed file inside the same patch doesn't work correctly (it fails to find new file). I didn't know how to fix this correctly, so I have the test fail expectedly.
The fix is relatively straight-forward. But I'm not sure if this new behaviour is something the git community wants.
Changes since v1 ================ - converted to path-list structs - added testcases for renaming a patch and apply a new patch on top inside the same patch file
Signed-off-by: Don Zickus <dzickus@redhat.com> --- builtin-apply.c | 69 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++- t/t4127-apply-same-fn.sh | 40 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 2 files changed, 108 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) create mode 100755 t/t4127-apply-same-fn.sh
diff --git a/builtin-apply.c b/builtin-apply.c index c497889..8330517 100644 --- a/builtin-apply.c +++ b/builtin-apply.c @@ -185,6 +185,18 @@ struct image { struct line *line; }; +/* + * Caches patch filenames to handle the case where a + * patch chunk reuses a filename + */ +struct fn_cache { + char *name; + struct patch *patch; + struct fn_cache *next; +}; + +struct fn_cache *fn_cache_top = NULL; + static uint32_t hash_line(const char *cp, size_t len) { size_t i; @@ -2176,6 +2188,51 @@ static int read_file_or_gitlink(struct cache_entry *ce, struct strbuf *buf) return 0; } +struct patch *in_fn_cache(char *name) +{ + struct fn_cache *p; + + for (p=fn_cache_top; p; p=p->next) { + if (!strcmp(name, p->name)) + return p->patch; + } + + return NULL; +} + +void add_to_fn_cache(char *name, struct patch *patch) +{ + struct fn_cache *fn_cache; + + /* Always add new_name unless patch is a deletion */ + if (name != NULL) { + fn_cache = xmalloc(sizeof(*fn_cache)); + + /* assuming the pointer to filename won't disappear */ + fn_cache->name = name; + fn_cache->patch = patch; + fn_cache->next = fn_cache_top; + + fn_cache_top = fn_cache; + } + + /* skip normal diffs, creations and copies */ + /* + * store a failure on rename/deletion cases because + * later chunks shouldn't patch old names + */ + if ((name == NULL) || (patch->is_rename)) { + fn_cache = xmalloc(sizeof(*fn_cache)); + + /* assuming the pointer to filename won't disappear */ + fn_cache->name = patch->old_name; + fn_cache->patch = (struct patch *) -1; + fn_cache->next = fn_cache_top; + + fn_cache_top = fn_cache; + } +} + static int apply_data(struct patch *patch, struct stat *st, struct cache_entry *ce) { struct strbuf buf; @@ -2188,7 +2245,16 @@ static int apply_data(struct patch *patch, struct stat *st, struct cache_entry * if (read_file_or_gitlink(ce, &buf)) return error("read of %s failed", patch->old_name); } else if (patch->old_name) { - if (S_ISGITLINK(patch->old_mode)) { + struct patch *tpatch = in_fn_cache(patch->old_name); + + if (tpatch != NULL) { + if (tpatch == (struct patch *) -1) { + return error("patch %s has been renamed/deleted", + patch->old_name); + } + /* We have a patched copy in memory use that */ + strbuf_add(&buf, tpatch->result, tpatch->resultsize); + } else if (S_ISGITLINK(patch->old_mode)) { if (ce) { read_file_or_gitlink(ce, &buf); } else { @@ -2211,6 +2277,7 @@ static int apply_data(struct patch *patch, struct stat *st, struct cache_entry * return -1; /* note with --reject this succeeds. */ patch->result = image.buf; patch->resultsize = image.len; + add_to_fn_cache(patch->new_name, patch); free(image.line_allocated); if (0 < patch->is_delete && patch->resultsize) diff --git a/t/t4127-apply-same-fn.sh b/t/t4127-apply-same-fn.sh new file mode 100755 index 0000000..a20bd8e --- /dev/null +++ b/t/t4127-apply-same-fn.sh @@ -0,0 +1,40 @@ +#!/bin/sh + +test_description='apply same filename' + +. ./test-lib.sh + +test_expect_success setup ' + for i in a b c d e f g h i j k l m + do + echo $i + done >same_fn && + git add same_fn && + git commit -m initial +' +test_expect_success 'apply same filename with independent changes' ' + sed -i -e "s/^d/z/" same_fn && + git diff > patch0 && + git add same_fn && + sed -i -e "s/^i/y/" same_fn && + git diff >> patch0 && + cp same_fn same_fn2 && + git reset --hard && + git-apply patch0 && + diff same_fn same_fn2 +' + +test_expect_success 'apply same filename with overlapping changes' ' + git reset --hard + sed -i -e "s/^d/z/" same_fn && + git diff > patch0 && + git add same_fn && + sed -i -e "s/^e/y/" same_fn && + git diff >> patch0 && + cp same_fn same_fn2 && + git reset --hard && + git-apply patch0 && + diff same_fn same_fn2 +' + +test_done
-- 1.5.6.rc2.48.g13da