git/list[1] front-page[2] threads[3] people[4] search[5] about
 

Re: Question about pre-merge and git merge octopus strategy

From
Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Date
May 19, 2022, 14:46 UTC
Message-ID
<CABPp-BFrifAymOVNniXiKWv2tZpgxQwxmZAhhGE8eaeJVODNkA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To
<CAOLTT8TDomk9zUg49yrhpu1T776FKrnu7RGJ_bx9iaYKUEvvTg@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, May 19, 2022 at 6:15 AM ZheNing Hu <adlternative@gmail.com> wrote:
Show 112 quoted lines
>
> Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com> 于2022年5月13日周五 13:16写道:
> >
> > On Thu, May 12, 2022 at 8:39 AM Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com> writes:
> > >
> > > >     Merge with strategy octopus failed.
> > > >
> > > > Also, if we check `git status`:
> > > >
> > > >     $ git status
> > > >     On branch main
> > > >     Unmerged paths:
> > > >       (use "git restore --staged <file>..." to unstage)
> > > >       (use "git add <file>..." to mark resolution)
> > > >     both modified:   base
> > > >
> > > >     no changes added to commit (use "git add" and/or "git commit -a")
> > > >
> > > > And in git-merge-octopus.sh we see:
> > > >
> > > >     case "$OCTOPUS_FAILURE" in
> > > >     1)
> > > >     # We allow only last one to have a hand-resolvable
> > > >     # conflicts.  Last round failed and we still had
> > > >     # a head to merge.
> > > >     gettextln "Automated merge did not work."
> > > >     gettextln "Should not be doing an octopus."
> > > >     exit 2
> > > >     esac
> > > >
> > > > and in builtin/merge.c, we see:
> > > >
> > > >     /*
> > > >      * The backend exits with 1 when conflicts are
> > > >      * left to be resolved, with 2 when it does not
> > > >      * handle the given merge at all.
> > > >      */
> > > >
> > > > Which means git-merge-octopus.sh is claiming it can't handle this type
> > > > of merge, and some other merge strategy should be tried, and
> > > > implicitly that it didn't leave any conflicts to be resolved because
> > > > it can't handle this merge.
> > >
> > > Correct.  Near the beginning of the loop you found the above
> > > comment, there is this code:
> > >
> > >         if (use_strategies_nr == 1 ||
> > >             /*
> > >              * Stash away the local changes so that we can try more than one.
> > >              */
> > >             save_state(&stash))
> > >                 oidclr(&stash);
> > >
> > >         for (i = 0; !merge_was_ok && i < use_strategies_nr; i++) {
> > >                 int ret, cnt;
> > >                 if (i) {
> > >                         printf(_("Rewinding the tree to pristine...\n"));
> > >                         restore_state(&head_commit->object.oid, &stash);
> > >                 }
> >
> > Side-comment, which becomes important below: The save/restore code in
> > builtin/merge.c appears to be broken to me.  As noted in the code
> > above, stash will be set to null_oid() if save_state() returns
> > non-zero (which happens when "stash create" has no output, which
> > happens if there is _initially_ no state to save, i.e. if there are no
> > local changes before the merge started).  restore_state() is a no-op
> > whenever stash is the null_oid, meaning in that case it won't actually
> > rewind the tree to a pristine state to undo the changes of the
> > previous merge attempt.  So, if:
> >
> > * The user had no local changes before starting the merge
> > * Multiple merge strategies are applicable
> > * The first merge strategy makes index/working-tree changes, but
> > returns with exit status 2
> >
> > Then the restore_state() called before the second merge strategy will
> > do nothing, and the second merge strategy will be working on an index
> > and working tree with garbage leftover from the first merge strategy.
> > While this may have never been triggered (in what case do we have
> > multiple merge strategies that all return an exit status of 2?), I
> > suspect we want to fix this problem with something like this:
> >
> > diff --git a/builtin/merge.c b/builtin/merge.c
> > index f178f5a3ee..7f3650fb09 100644
> > --- a/builtin/merge.c
> > +++ b/builtin/merge.c
> > @@ -378,11 +378,11 @@ static void restore_state(const struct object_id *head,
> >         struct strbuf sb = STRBUF_INIT;
> >         const char *args[] = { "stash", "apply", NULL, NULL };
> >
> > +       reset_hard(head, 1);
> > +
> >         if (is_null_oid(stash))
> >                 return;
> >
> > -       reset_hard(head, 1);
> > -
> >         args[2] = oid_to_hex(stash);
> >
> >         /*
> >
>
> It looks like this code can go back to the old state now?
>
> I think if we can handle it as special case when:
>
> 1. Use octopus merge without other strategies (no friend).
> 2. Merge failed, so we don't have the best strategy.
>
> Then we force restore the original state?

Yeah, I've got some patches ready; just didn't submit yet as I was hoping to get time to update the in-core merge series. https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git/pull/1231

Previous: ZheNing HuNext: ZheNing Hu
Message 13 of 15 in “Question about pre-merge and git merge octopus strategy”
  1. ZheNing HuMay 6, 2022
  2. Christian CouderMay 6, 2022
  3. Elijah NewrenMay 7, 2022
  4. Junio C HamanoMay 7, 2022
  5. ZheNing HuMay 8, 2022
  6. Elijah NewrenMay 10, 2022
  7. ZheNing HuMay 11, 2022
  8. Elijah NewrenMay 12, 2022
  9. Junio C HamanoMay 12, 2022
  10. Elijah NewrenMay 13, 2022
  11. Junio C HamanoMay 13, 2022
  12. ZheNing HuMay 19, 2022
  13. Elijah NewrenMay 19, 2022
  14. ZheNing HuMay 8, 2022
  15. Carlo Marcelo Arenas BelónMay 8, 2022

Read the whole thread, see it on lore, or plain text.

$ cat FOOTERMessages come from the public archive at lore.kernel.org/git, fetched every hour. The front page is chosen and written each morning by an AI editor and can be wrong; the threads themselves are the record. About and API. For agents: an MCP server at https://gitlist.dev/mcp, and any thread, story or person page as Markdown by adding .md to its URL (or sending Accept: text/markdown). Details in /llms.txt.