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

Re: [PATCH 4/6] t: use hash-object --literally when created malformed objects

From
Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Date
Jan 19, 2023, 02:06 UTC
Message-ID
<Y8ilsLkR7R2uu542@coredump.intra.peff.net>
In-Reply-To
<Y8hiWGOArYqzen58@nand.local>
On Wed, Jan 18, 2023 at 04:19:20PM -0500, Taylor Blau wrote:
Show 16 quoted lines
> > This patch is worth looking at because it shows the kinds of things the
> > new hash-object from patch 6 will reject.
> 
> Obviously we could avoid this patch entirely by making the new behavior
> of fscking the incoming objects hidden behind a `--fsck` flag or
> something. But I think the decision not to is a good one.
> 
> We already have `--literally`, and it makes sense that passing that
> should let us write anything, and that not passing it should perform
> some validity checks. But I think exactly *what* those checks are is
> ambiguous enough that the absence of `--literally` implying fsck checks
> isn't out of the question.
> 
> You address this in the last patch more thoroughly, but I figure that it
> is worth stating some of this here during review to indicate that I
> think the direction you pursued here is a good one.

Thanks for raising this, I think it's a good thing to consider. I didn't even really think about making it a new option, since we already do quality checks (and loosen them via --literally). This just seemed like more of the same.

So yeah, if there were people who really wanted to distinguish between the severity of the old checks and the new ones, we can add --fsck (or even default to having it on, and disable it with --no-fsck to get the old checks). But I just see little point in that.

One thing we _could_ support that my patch doesn't (I think; I didn't test very deeply here) is respecting individual fsck.msgType config variables. Again, I don't really see much point there. If you know you are producing garbage, then just say --literally. The type-specific ones are useful when you have to hold your nose and accept somebody else's historical garbage, and you want to limit the damage as much as possible.

-Peff
Previous: Taylor BlauNext: Jeff King
Message 8 of 28 in “hash-object: use fsck to check objects”
  1. 0/6 hash-object: use fsck to check objectsJeff King, Jan 18, 2023
  2. 1/6 t1007: modernize malformed object testsJeff King, Jan 18, 2023
  3. Taylor BlauJan 18, 2023
  4. 2/6 t1006: stop using 0-padded timestampsJeff King, Jan 18, 2023
  5. 3/6 t7030: stop using invalid tag nameJeff King, Jan 18, 2023
  6. 4/6 t: use hash-object --literally when created malformed objectsJeff King, Jan 18, 2023
  7. Taylor BlauJan 18, 2023
  8. Jeff KingJan 19, 2023
  9. 5/6 fsck: provide a function to fsck buffer without object structJeff King, Jan 18, 2023
  10. Taylor BlauJan 18, 2023
  11. Jeff KingJan 19, 2023
  12. 6/6 hash-object: use fsck for object checksJeff King, Jan 18, 2023
  13. Taylor BlauJan 18, 2023
  14. Jeff KingJan 19, 2023
  15. Jeff KingFeb 1, 2023
  16. Ævar Arnfjörð BjarmasonFeb 1, 2023
  17. Junio C HamanoFeb 1, 2023
  18. Jeff KingJan 18, 2023
  19. Junio C HamanoJan 18, 2023
  20. Taylor BlauJan 18, 2023
  21. Jeff KingJan 19, 2023
  22. Jeff KingJan 19, 2023
  23. 7/6 fsck: do not assume NUL-termination of buffersJeff King, Jan 19, 2023
  24. Junio C HamanoJan 19, 2023
  25. René ScharfeJan 21, 2023
  26. Jeff KingJan 22, 2023
  27. René ScharfeJan 22, 2023
  28. Ævar Arnfjörð BjarmasonFeb 1, 2023

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.