Re: [PATCH v3 09/20] commit-graph: verify corrupt OID fanout and lookup

> Derrick Stolee <dstolee@microsoft.com> writes:
>
>> In the commit-graph file, the OID fanout chunk provides an index into
>> the OID lookup. The 'verify' subcommand should find incorrect values
>> in the fanout.
>>
>> Similarly, the 'verify' subcommand should find out-of-order values in
>> the OID lookup.
> O.K., the OID Lookup chunk is checked together with OID Fanout chunk
> because those two chunks are tightly connected: OID Fanout is fanout
> into OID Lookup.
>
>> Signed-off-by: Derrick Stolee <dstolee@microsoft.com>
>> ---
>>   commit-graph.c          | 36 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>>   t/t5318-commit-graph.sh | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++++
>>   2 files changed, 58 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/commit-graph.c b/commit-graph.c
>> index 06e3e4f9ba..cbd1aae514 100644
>> --- a/commit-graph.c
>> +++ b/commit-graph.c
>> @@ -855,6 +855,9 @@ static void graph_report(const char *fmt, ...)
>>   
>>   int verify_commit_graph(struct commit_graph *g)
>>   {
>> +	uint32_t i, cur_fanout_pos = 0;
>> +	struct object_id prev_oid, cur_oid;
> Minor nitpick about the naming convention: why cur_*, and not curr_*?
>
>> +
>>   	if (!g) {
>>   		graph_report("no commit-graph file loaded");
>>   		return 1;
>> @@ -869,5 +872,38 @@ int verify_commit_graph(struct commit_graph *g)
>>   	if (!g->chunk_commit_data)
>>   		graph_report("commit-graph is missing the Commit Data chunk");
>>   
>> +	if (verify_commit_graph_error)
>> +		return verify_commit_graph_error;
>> +
> Before checking that commits in OID Lookup are sorted, and that OID
> Fanout correctly points into OID Lookup (thus also checking that OID
> Lookup is sorted), it would be good to verify that sizes of those chunks
> are correct.
>
> Out of 4 standrd chunks, 1 of them (OIDF) has constant size, and 2 of
> them have size given by number of commits and hash size
>   - OID Fanout is (256 * 4 bytes)
>   - OID Lookup is (N * H bytes),
>     where N is number of commits, and H is hash size
>
> The one that is more significant is if number of commits gets corrupted
> upwards, and walking through OID Lookup would lead us out of bounds,
> outside the file size.
>
> IIRC we have checked that all chunks fit within file size, isn't it?
>
>> +	for (i = 0; i < g->num_commits; i++) {
>> +		hashcpy(cur_oid.hash, g->chunk_oid_lookup + g->hash_len * i);
> Why do you use hashcpy() here, but oidcpy() below?

>
>> +
>> +		if (i && oidcmp(&prev_oid, &cur_oid) >= 0)
> All right, OIDs needs to be sorted in ascending lexicographical order,
> and the above condition checks that this constraint is fullfilled.
>
>> +			graph_report("commit-graph has incorrect OID order: %s then %s",
>> +				     oid_to_hex(&prev_oid),
>> +				     oid_to_hex(&cur_oid));
> Nice informative error message.
>
>> +
>> +		oidcpy(&prev_oid, &cur_oid);
>> +
>> +		while (cur_oid.hash[0] > cur_fanout_pos) {
>> +			uint32_t fanout_value = get_be32(g->chunk_oid_fanout + cur_fanout_pos);
>> +			if (i != fanout_value)
>> +				graph_report("commit-graph has incorrect fanout value: fanout[%d] = %u != %u",
>> +					     cur_fanout_pos, fanout_value, i);
>> +
>> +			cur_fanout_pos++;
>> +		}
> The k-th entry of fanout, F[k], stores the number of OIDs with first
> byte at most k.
>
> Let's examine it in detail on a simple example:
>
>     fanout                     lookup
>     ------                     ------
>     0 : 0  ---------------> 0: 1xxxx....
>     1 : 2  -----\           1: 1yyyy....
>     2 : 2  ------\--------> 2: 3xxxx....
>     3 : 3  ---------------> 3: 4xxxx....
>
> We are checking that after most significant byte (first byte) changes,
> then all fanout position up to the current first byte value (exclusive)
> point to current position in OID Lookup chunk.
>
> Seems all right; it would be nice to come up with rigorous proof that it
> is all right.
>
>> +	}
>> +
>> +	while (cur_fanout_pos < 256) {
>> +		uint32_t fanout_value = get_be32(g->chunk_oid_fanout + cur_fanout_pos);
>> +
>> +		if (g->num_commits != fanout_value)
>> +			graph_report("commit-graph has incorrect fanout value: fanout[%d] = %u != %u",
>> +				     cur_fanout_pos, fanout_value, i);
>> +
>> +		cur_fanout_pos++;
>> +	}
> All right, this checks that all remaining fanout entries, up and
> including the 255-ith entry store the total number of commits, N.
>
>> +
>>   	return verify_commit_graph_error;
>>   }
>> diff --git a/t/t5318-commit-graph.sh b/t/t5318-commit-graph.sh
>> index 4ef3fe3dc2..c050ef980b 100755
>> --- a/t/t5318-commit-graph.sh
>> +++ b/t/t5318-commit-graph.sh
>> @@ -247,6 +247,7 @@ test_expect_success 'git commit-graph verify' '
>>   	git commit-graph verify >output
>>   '
>>   
>> +HASH_LEN=20
>>   GRAPH_BYTE_VERSION=4
>>   GRAPH_BYTE_HASH=5
>>   GRAPH_BYTE_CHUNK_COUNT=6
>> @@ -258,6 +259,12 @@ GRAPH_BYTE_OID_LOOKUP_ID=`expr $GRAPH_CHUNK_LOOKUP_OFFSET + \
>>   			      1 \* $GRAPH_CHUNK_LOOKUP_WIDTH`
>>   GRAPH_BYTE_COMMIT_DATA_ID=`expr $GRAPH_CHUNK_LOOKUP_OFFSET + \
>>   				2 \* $GRAPH_CHUNK_LOOKUP_WIDTH`
>> +GRAPH_FANOUT_OFFSET=`expr $GRAPH_CHUNK_LOOKUP_OFFSET + \
>> +			  $GRAPH_CHUNK_LOOKUP_WIDTH \* $GRAPH_CHUNK_LOOKUP_ROWS`
>> +GRAPH_BYTE_FANOUT1=`expr $GRAPH_FANOUT_OFFSET + 4 \* 4`
>> +GRAPH_BYTE_FANOUT2=`expr $GRAPH_FANOUT_OFFSET + 4 \* 255`
>> +GRAPH_OID_LOOKUP_OFFSET=`expr $GRAPH_FANOUT_OFFSET + 4 \* 256`
>> +GRAPH_BYTE_OID_LOOKUP_ORDER=`expr $GRAPH_OID_LOOKUP_OFFSET + $HASH_LEN \* 8`
> Something that I forgot to write about in previous patch.
>
> POSIX shell includes $(( ... )) for arithmetic expansion, there is
> nowadays no need to use $(expr ...), and even more no need to use
> pre-POSIX `expr ...`.
>
> TLDR: use $(( ... )), not `expr ... `.

>
>>   
>>   # usage: corrupt_graph_and_verify <position> <data> <string>
>>   # Manipulates the commit-graph file at the position
>> @@ -312,4 +319,19 @@ test_expect_success 'detect missing commit data chunk' '
>>   		"missing the Commit Data chunk"
>>   '
>>   
>> +test_expect_success 'detect incorrect fanout' '
>> +	corrupt_graph_and_verify $GRAPH_BYTE_FANOUT1 "\01" \
> How can you be sure that this value is incorrect?

>
>> +		"fanout value"
>> +'
>> +
>> +test_expect_success 'detect incorrect fanout' '
>> +	corrupt_graph_and_verify $GRAPH_BYTE_FANOUT2 "\01" \
>> +		"fanout value"
>> +'
> I would prefer if different tests had different description.  Those two
> are both 'detect incorrect layout'.  What is the difference between them?

>
>> +
>> +test_expect_success 'detect incorrect OID order' '
>> +	corrupt_graph_and_verify $GRAPH_BYTE_OID_LOOKUP_ORDER "\01" \
>> +		"incorrect OID order"
>> +'
> How can you be sure that this value is incorrect, or rather that it
> would be always incorrect?
>
>> +
>>   test_done