Re: [BUG] v2.16.0-rc0 seg faults when git bisect skip

Short answer: there are no commits left to test.

The list is built in the for-loop in `find_bisection()`. So the technical answer is: if all commits in the initial list `commit_list` are UNINTERESTING (including if `commit_list` is empty to begin with).

It's also helpful to study where we should end up from there. We should take the `if (!revs.commits)` branch in `bisect_next_all()`. That is, we should print either "There are only 'skip'ped commits left to test. The first bad commit could be any of:" or "<commit> was both good and bad".

Right, you marked a commit both good and bad. That's probably not very common. But it obviously happens. :-)

On 5 January 2018 at 06:28, Yasushi SHOJI <yasushi.shoji@gmail.com> wrote:

Thank you for providing a script for reproducing this. It helped me come up with the attached patch. The patch is based on ma/bisect-leakfix, which includes Ævar's patch.

I think this patch could be useful, either as a final "let's test something previously non-tested; this would have caught the segfault", or simply squashed into Ævar's patch as a "let's add a test that would have caught this, and which also tests a previously non-tested code path."

Thanks for digging and finding a reproduction recipe.

Martin

-- >8 --
Subject: [PATCH] bisect: add test for marking commit both good and bad

Since 670f5fe34f ([PATCH] Fix bisection terminating condition, 2005-08-30), we have noticed and complained when a commit was marked both good and bad. But we had no tests for this behavior.

Test the behavior when we mark a commit first bad, then good, but also when we are already in the bad state, where `git bisect skip` should notice it.

This test would have caught the segfault which was recently fixed in 2e9fdc795c (bisect: fix a regression causing a segfault, 2018-01-03).

Signed-off-by: Martin Ågren <martin.agren@gmail.com>
---
 t/t6030-bisect-porcelain.sh | 9 +++++++++
 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+)