Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] builtin/unpack-objects.c: change xwrite to write_in_full avoid truncation.

From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Date: Mar 7, 2024, 10:00 UTC
Message-ID: <20240307100018.GE2650063@coredump.intra.peff.net>
In-Reply-To: <03d701da69c0$c3430e80$49c92b80$@nexbridge.com>

On Tue, Feb 27, 2024 at 04:05:53PM -0500, rsbecker@nexbridge.com wrote:

Show 7 quoted lines

> Unfortunately, I do not have sufficient knowledge of the code to
> resolve the originally reported problem without further assistance to
> determine the root case (assuming it still is a problem). Changes in
> master post-2.44.0 appear to have contributed to resolving the
> situation, so I am now getting random pass/fail on the test. I'm going
> to hold 2.44.0 on ia64 and wait for a subsequent release at retest at
> that time.

If you're getting random pass/fail (which does seem like the kind of thing that could be related to pipe write() sizes), you might try using the "--stress" argument. That can give you more consistent results while bisecting (e.g., if "--stress" runs successfully for a few minutes).

That said, given the failing test you mentioned, I kind of assume that it was not a code change that caused the problem, but rather a new test exercising new code that happens to tickle your race.

-Peff