Re: [ANNOUNCE] Git v2.32.0-rc1 - Defect in t0301.3, t1092.6, t5300
- From
Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com>
- Date
- May 25, 2021, 15:09 UTC
- Message-ID
- <YK0TKVZidW/G8XBr@nand.local>
- In-Reply-To
- <037d01d75168$5a5aaea0$0f100be0$@nexbridge.com>
On Tue, May 25, 2021 at 09:17:40AM -0400, Randall S. Becker wrote:
Show 54 quoted lines
> On May 24, 2021 6:44 PM, Taylor Blau wrote:
> >To: Randall S. Becker <rsbecker@nexbridge.com>
> >Cc: 'Junio C Hamano' <gitster@pobox.com>; 'Jean-Noël AVILA' <jn.avila@free.fr>; git@vger.kernel.org
> >Subject: Re: [ANNOUNCE] Git v2.32.0-rc1 - Defect in t0301.3, t1092.6, t5300
> >
> >On Mon, May 24, 2021 at 06:37:29PM -0400, Randall S. Becker wrote:
> >> On running the test suite on NonStop, t1092 fails in subtest 6 - but
> >> not when run with --verbose and -x, so I can't supply a log. This may
> >> be timing related. I wanted to report this in case anyone had any
> >> insight on whether there are any possible transient vulnerabilities.
> >
> >The failure in t1092 sounds should be addressed by
> >
> > https://lore.kernel.org/git/pull.960.git.1621886108515.gitgitgadget@gmail.com/
> >
> >> t0301.3 often has transient failures - which has been experienced for
> >> a while. Most importantly, t5300 continues to fail completely on the
> >> x86 platform, but not ia64, which I previously reported.
> >
> >Not sure about these, though.
>
> Thanks will wait for the roll on that one. We had one loggable transient failure in t1096.15:
>
> expecting success of 1092.15 'merge with outside renames':
> init_repos &&
>
> for type in out-to-out out-to-in in-to-out
> do
> test_all_match git reset --hard &&
> test_all_match git checkout -f -b merge-$type update-deep &&
> test_all_match git merge -m "$type" rename-$type &&
> test_all_match git rev-parse HEAD^{tree} || return 1
> done
>
> + init_repos
> Updating files: 100% (14/14), done.
> HEAD is now at 5d0e8a6 initial commit
> Updating files: 100% (14/14), done.
> HEAD is now at 5d0e8a6 initial commit
> Updating files: 100% (14/14), done.
> HEAD is now at 5d0e8a6 initial commit
> Updating files: 100% (10/10), done.
> Updating files: 100% (7/7), done.
> Updating files: 100% (10/10), done.
> Updating files: 100% (7/7), done.
> + test_all_match git reset --hard
> + test_all_match git checkout -f -b merge-out-to-out update-deep
> + test_all_match git merge -m out-to-out rename-out-to-out
> --- full-checkout-err 2021-05-24 22:49:44 +0000
> +++ sparse-checkout-err 2021-05-24 22:49:50 +0000
> @@ -1 +0,0 @@
> Updating files: 100% (5/5), done.
> + return 1
> error: last command exited with $?=1I'm having trouble reading this: is 'return 1' part of the output written to sparse-checkout-err?
In either case, the "updating files" progress meter is coming from unpack-trees.c:get_progress(). Looking a little further:
- get_progress() is called by check_updates(), which is called by
unpack_trees() and update_sparsity() - update_sparsity() is called by the sparse-checkout builtin, which
sets 'o.verbose_update = isatty(2)', so that caller is good. - 'git merge' is the last command invoked by t1092.15, and it calls
unpack_trees() from 'builtin/merge.c:read_tree_trivial()', and sets
'opts.verbose_update = 1'.Stolee's patch to set GIT_PROGRESS_DELAY=-1 will obviously take care of this, but we should probably apply something like this on top (and maybe look further at other callers of unpack_trees() to make sure they set opts.verbose_update correctly; I stopped after I found the problem here).
--- >8 ---
diff --git a/builtin/merge.c b/builtin/merge.c index eddb8ae70d..5f926d3edc 100644 --- a/builtin/merge.c +++ b/builtin/merge.c @@ -677,7 +677,7 @@ static int read_tree_trivial(struct object_id *common, struct object_id *head, opts.src_index = &the_index; opts.dst_index = &the_index; opts.update = 1; - opts.verbose_update = 1; + opts.verbose_update = isatty(2); opts.trivial_merges_only = 1; opts.merge = 1; trees[nr_trees] = parse_tree_indirect(common);