Re: [PATCH 4/4] pack-check: fix verification of large objects
- From
Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
- Date
- Feb 23, 2026, 12:58 UTC
- Message-ID
- <20260223125843.GA215671@coredump.intra.peff.net>
- In-Reply-To
- <aZw6W_BHoYiC9RYl@pks.im>
On Mon, Feb 23, 2026 at 12:30:35PM +0100, Patrick Steinhardt wrote:
Show 17 quoted lines
> > A more concrete test would probably be something like: > > > > 1. Two packs, $X and $Y, both contain the same object. > > > > 2. The object is corrupt in $X but not in $Y. > > > > 3. Running fsck detects that one copy is corrupt but the other is > > not. > > > > Right now it may or may not fail depending on the ordering of the packs > > in the MRU list (which we might be able to tweak via mtimes). But > > hopefully in the "after" state it should deterministically complain > > about $X. > > Yeah. The problem I had here is that I'm not sure whether we have any > tools to reliably create a corrupted object, e.g. with a hash mismatch. > I'll have a look for v2.
You can see how do_corrupt_object() in t5303 does it. It's basically finding an offset via show-index and then writing a zero over it with dd.
-Peff