From: Patrick Steinhardt Date: Mon, 01 Dec 2025 12:58:19 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 3/3] fetch: fix failed batched updates skipping operations Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <20251121-fix-tags-not-fetching-v8-3-23b53a8a8334@gmail.com> On Fri, Nov 21, 2025 at 12:13:47PM +0100, Karthik Nayak wrote: > Fix a regression introduced with batched updates in 0e358de64a (fetch: > use batched reference updates, 2025-05-19) when fetching references. In > the `do_fetch()` function, we jump to cleanup if committing the > transaction fails, regardless of whether using batched or atomic > updates. This skips three subsequent operations: > > - Update 'FETCH_HEAD' as part of `commit_fetch_head()`. > > - Add upstream tracking information via `set_upstream()`. > > - Setting remote 'HEAD' values when `do_set_head` is true. > > For atomic updates, this is expected behavior. For batched updates, > we want to continue with these operations even if some refs fail to > update. > > Skipping `commit_fetch_head()` isn't actually a regression because > 'FETCH_HEAD' is already updated via `append_fetch_head()` when not > using '--atomic'. However, we add a test to validate this behavior. This raises the question what happens when this function _does_ get executed again. But we're guarding us: static void commit_fetch_head(struct fetch_head *fetch_head) { if (!fetch_head->fp || !atomic_fetch) return; strbuf_write(&fetch_head->buf, fetch_head->fp); } And as we only `goto cleanup` in case `retcode && atomic_fetch` we know that the above function will exit early. So this is a no-op change indeed. > Skipping the other two operations (upstream tracking and remote HEAD) > is a regression. Fix this by only jumping to cleanup when using > '--atomic', allowing batched updates to continue with post-fetch > operations. Add tests to prevent future regressions. Makes sense. > diff --git a/t/t5510-fetch.sh b/t/t5510-fetch.sh > index 4b113d7c27..a1ca4e1ac7 100755 > --- a/t/t5510-fetch.sh > +++ b/t/t5510-fetch.sh > @@ -1639,6 +1639,94 @@ test_expect_success "backfill tags when providing a refspec" ' > test_cmp expect actual > ' > > +test_expect_success REFFILES "FETCH_HEAD is updated even if ref updates fail" ' > + test_when_finished rm -rf base repo && > + > + git init base && > + ( > + cd base && > + test_commit "updated" && > + > + git update-ref refs/heads/foo @ && > + git update-ref refs/heads/branch @ > + ) && > + > + git init --bare repo && > + ( > + cd repo && > + rm -f FETCH_HEAD && > + git remote add origin ../base && > + >refs/heads/foo.lock && Hm. Is this compatible with all supported systems? We typically write this as: : >refs/heads/foo.lock But I have to acknowledge that I only do this because some people that are more knowledgeable than I am know that we need this. Other than that I'm happy with the current state of this patch series. If the above turns out to be a non-issue I think it should be ready for 'next'. Thanks! Patrick