Re: [PATCH 8/8] commit-graph: drop COMMIT_GRAPH_WRITE_CHECK_OIDS flag
- From
Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
- Date
- May 7, 2020, 20:40 UTC
- Message-ID
- <20200507204005.GE29683@coredump.intra.peff.net>
- In-Reply-To
- <6c2d130b0cd4b6a8a541b362ae7dd44d4c282e3f.1588641176.git.me@ttaylorr.com>
On Mon, May 04, 2020 at 07:14:03PM -0600, Taylor Blau wrote:
Show 6 quoted lines
> If callers do wish to retain this behavior, they can easily work around
> this change by doing the following:
>
> git for-each-ref --format='%(objectname) %(objecttype) %(*objecttype)' |
> awk '/commit/ { print $1 }' |
> git commit-graph write --stdin-commitsI know this came from my earlier email, but I think that recipe actually shows how to make your input work even if --check-oids were the default. If you really want the --check-oids behavior, you'd want the opposite: to complain about those ones. So it's something like:
git for-each-ref --format='%(objectname) %(objecttype) %(*objecttype)' |
awk '
!/commit/ { print "not-a-commit:"$1 }
/commit/ { print $1 }
' |
git commit-graph write --stdin-commitsShow 14 quoted lines
> diff --git a/Documentation/git-commit-graph.txt b/Documentation/git-commit-graph.txt > index 53a650225a..fcac7d12e1 100644 > --- a/Documentation/git-commit-graph.txt > +++ b/Documentation/git-commit-graph.txt > @@ -47,8 +47,10 @@ with `--stdin-commits` or `--reachable`.) > + > With the `--stdin-commits` option, generate the new commit graph by > walking commits starting at the commits specified in stdin as a list > -of OIDs in hex, one OID per line. (Cannot be combined with > -`--stdin-packs` or `--reachable`.) > +of OIDs in hex, one OID per line. OIDs that resolve to non-commits > +(either directly, or by peeling tags) are silently ignored. OIDs that > +are malformed, or do not exist generate an error. (Cannot be combined > +with `--stdin-packs` or `--reachable`.)
Yeah, I think these semantics are good.
Show 22 quoted lines
> diff --git a/builtin/commit-graph.c b/builtin/commit-graph.c
> index 9eec68572f..3637d079fb 100644
> --- a/builtin/commit-graph.c
> +++ b/builtin/commit-graph.c
> @@ -153,13 +153,14 @@ static int read_one_commit(struct oidset *commits, struct progress *progress,
>
> display_progress(progress, oidset_size(commits) + 1);
>
> + if (oid_object_info(the_repository, &oid, NULL) < 0) {
> + error(_("object %s does not exist"), hash);
> + return 1;
> + }
> +
> result = lookup_commit_reference_gently(the_repository, &oid, 1);
> if (result)
> oidset_insert(commits, &result->object.oid);
> - else {
> - error(_("invalid commit object id: %s"), hash);
> - return 1;
> - }
> return 0;
> }We can avoid the object-existence check entirely if lookup_commit_reference_gently() gives us an answer. And we'd expect that to be the common path.
Also, using has_object_file() is cheaper than oid_object_info(), since it doesn't have to resolve the type for deltas.
So perhaps:
result = lookup_commit_reference_gently(...);
if (result)
oidset_insert(...);
else if (has_object_file(&oid))
; /* not a commit; quietly ignore;
else
return error(no such object...);That said, I think this technique misses some cases of corruption. You're checking that the outer-most object exists, but not any intermediate peeled objects. I.e., lookup_commit_reference_gently() might have failed for two reasons:
- an object it peeled to didn't exist
- an object it peeled to wasn't a commit
To do it thoroughly, I think you'd have to call deref_tag() yourself and distinguish NULL there (an error) from a result where obj->type isn't OBJ_COMMIT (quietly ignore).
Show 11 quoted lines
> enum commit_graph_write_flags {
> - COMMIT_GRAPH_WRITE_APPEND = (1 << 0),
> - COMMIT_GRAPH_WRITE_PROGRESS = (1 << 1),
> - COMMIT_GRAPH_WRITE_SPLIT = (1 << 2),
> - /* Make sure that each OID in the input is a valid commit OID. */
> - COMMIT_GRAPH_WRITE_CHECK_OIDS = (1 << 3),
> - COMMIT_GRAPH_WRITE_BLOOM_FILTERS = (1 << 4),
> + COMMIT_GRAPH_WRITE_APPEND = (1 << 0),
> + COMMIT_GRAPH_WRITE_PROGRESS = (1 << 1),
> + COMMIT_GRAPH_WRITE_SPLIT = (1 << 2),
> + COMMIT_GRAPH_WRITE_BLOOM_FILTERS = (1 << 3)As much as I love looking at matched-indentation lists, I think this diff is a good example of why it's not worth doing. It's much easier to see what's going on if the first three items aren't touched. I'd actually even leave BLOOM_FILTERS where it is, and accept the hole which could be refilled later.
Your patch also loses the trailing comma after the final BLOOM_FILTERS entry.
-Peff