[PATCH 2/3] merge-recursive: fix logic ordering issue
- From
Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
- Date
- Jan 5, 2018, 20:20 UTC
- Message-ID
- <20180105202001.24218-3-newren@gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <20180105202001.24218-1-newren@gmail.com>
merge_trees() did a variety of work, including:
* Calling get_unmerged() to get unmerged entries
* Calling record_df_conflict_files() with all unmerged entries to
do some work to ensure we could handle D/F conflicts correctly
* Calling get_renames() to check for renames.An easily overlooked issue is that get_renames() can create more unmerged entries and add them to the list, which have the possibility of being involved in D/F conflicts. So the call to record_df_conflict_files() should really be moved after all the rename detection. I didn't come up with any testcases demonstrating any bugs with the old ordering, but I suspect there were some for both normal renames and for directory renames. Fix the ordering.
Reviewed-By: Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com> Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com> --- merge-recursive.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/merge-recursive.c b/merge-recursive.c index d00b27438..98c84e73d 100644 --- a/merge-recursive.c +++ b/merge-recursive.c @@ -1982,10 +1982,10 @@ int merge_trees(struct merge_options *o, get_files_dirs(o, merge); entries = get_unmerged(); - record_df_conflict_files(o, entries); re_head = get_renames(o, head, common, head, merge, entries); re_merge = get_renames(o, merge, common, head, merge, entries); clean = process_renames(o, re_head, re_merge); + record_df_conflict_files(o, entries); if (clean < 0) goto cleanup; for (i = entries->nr-1; 0 <= i; i--) {
-- 2.14.2