Re: [PATCH v2 3/7] read-tree: expand sparse checkout test coverage
- From
Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
- Date
- Feb 28, 2022, 23:46 UTC
- Message-ID
- <220301.86sfs21ri8.gmgdl@evledraar.gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <509e860c-5bda-b92f-96c5-39f9a54f1e9b@github.com>
On Mon, Feb 28 2022, Victoria Dye wrote:
Show 85 quoted lines
> Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote: >> >> On Thu, Feb 24 2022, Victoria Dye via GitGitGadget wrote: >> >>> From: Victoria Dye <vdye@github.com> >>> >>> Add tests focused on how 'git read-tree' behaves in sparse checkouts. Extra >>> emphasis is placed on interactions with files outside the sparse cone, e.g. >>> merges with out-of-cone conflicts. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Victoria Dye <vdye@github.com> >>> --- >>> t/perf/p2000-sparse-operations.sh | 1 + >>> t/t1092-sparse-checkout-compatibility.sh | 85 ++++++++++++++++++++++++ >>> 2 files changed, 86 insertions(+) >>> >>> diff --git a/t/perf/p2000-sparse-operations.sh b/t/perf/p2000-sparse-operations.sh >>> index 2a7106b9495..382716cfca9 100755 >>> --- a/t/perf/p2000-sparse-operations.sh >>> +++ b/t/perf/p2000-sparse-operations.sh >>> @@ -117,6 +117,7 @@ test_perf_on_all git diff >>> test_perf_on_all git diff --cached >>> test_perf_on_all git blame $SPARSE_CONE/a >>> test_perf_on_all git blame $SPARSE_CONE/f3/a >>> +test_perf_on_all git read-tree -mu HEAD >>> test_perf_on_all git checkout-index -f --all >>> test_perf_on_all git update-index --add --remove $SPARSE_CONE/a >>> >>> diff --git a/t/t1092-sparse-checkout-compatibility.sh b/t/t1092-sparse-checkout-compatibility.sh >>> index b1dcaa0e642..9d58da4e925 100755 >>> --- a/t/t1092-sparse-checkout-compatibility.sh >>> +++ b/t/t1092-sparse-checkout-compatibility.sh >>> @@ -819,6 +819,91 @@ test_expect_success 'update-index --cacheinfo' ' >>> test_cmp expect sparse-checkout-out >>> ' >>> >>> +test_expect_success 'read-tree --merge with files outside sparse definition' ' >>> + init_repos && >>> + >>> + test_all_match git checkout -b test-branch update-folder1 && >>> + for MERGE_TREES in "base HEAD update-folder2" \ >>> + "update-folder1 update-folder2" \ >>> + "update-folder2" >>> + do >>> + # Clean up and remove on-disk files >>> + test_all_match git reset --hard HEAD && >>> + test_sparse_match git sparse-checkout reapply && >>> + >>> + # Although the index matches, without --no-sparse-checkout, outside-of- >>> + # definition files will not exist on disk for sparse checkouts >>> + test_all_match git read-tree -mu $MERGE_TREES && >>> + test_all_match git status --porcelain=v2 && >>> + test_path_is_missing sparse-checkout/folder2 && >>> + test_path_is_missing sparse-index/folder2 && >>> + >>> + test_all_match git read-tree --reset -u HEAD && >>> + test_all_match git status --porcelain=v2 && >>> + >>> + test_all_match git read-tree -mu --no-sparse-checkout $MERGE_TREES && >>> + test_all_match git status --porcelain=v2 && >>> + test_cmp sparse-checkout/folder2/a sparse-index/folder2/a && >>> + test_cmp sparse-checkout/folder2/a full-checkout/folder2/a || return 1 >>> + done >>> +' >> >> Nit: Isn't this nicer/easier by unrolling the for-loop to the top-level, i.e.: >> >> for MERGE_TREES in "base HEAD update-folder2" [...] >> do >> test_expect_success "'read-tree -mu $MERGE_TREES' with files outside sparse definition" ' >> init_repos && >> test_when_finished "test_all_match git reset --hard HEAD" && >> ... >> ' >> done >> >> It makes failures easier to reason about since you see which for-loop >> iteration you're in right away, and can e.g. pick one with --run. >> > > I like how this separates the test cases (while not adding any > redundant/copied code). I'll update in the next version, thanks! > >> And we can do the cleanup in test_when_finished instead of at the start >> of every loop.
Sounds good!
Note for <reasons> we eval the body of the test into existence, but *not* the description. So:
for x in [...] test_expect_success "$x" '$x'
Works to expand "$x" in both cases, but not:
for x in [...] test_expect_success '$x' '$x'
And you don't need to do:
for x in [...] test_expect_success "$x" "$x"
Which is handy as double-quoting the body is often a hassle with escaping stuff.
I only think I got that wrong the first 1, 2, 3.... etc. times I used this pattern, so I thought I'd mention it :)
> Because `init_repos` completely resets the test repos, this actually lets me > remove the extra cleanup steps completely.
\o/