Re: [PATCH] sparse-index: copy dir_hash in ensure_full_index()

> From: Jeff Hostetler <jeffhost@microsoft.com>
>
> Copy the 'index_state->dir_hash' back to the real istate after expanding
> a sparse index.
>
> A crash was observed in 'git status' during some hashmap lookups with
> corrupted hashmap entries.  During an index expansion, new cache-entries
> are added to the 'index_state->name_hash' and the 'dir_hash' in a
> temporary 'index_state' variable 'full'.  However, only the 'name_hash'
> hashmap from this temp variable was copied back into the real 'istate'
> variable.  The original copy of the 'dir_hash' was incorrectly
> preserved.  If the table in the 'full->dir_hash' hashmap were realloced,
> the stale version (in 'istate') would be corrupted.
>
> The test suite does not operate on index sizes sufficiently large to
> trigger this reallocation, so they do not cover this behavior.
> Increasing the test suite to cover such scale is fragile and likely
> wasteful.

>
> Signed-off-by: Jeff Hostetler <jeffhost@microsoft.com>
> Signed-off-by: Derrick Stolee <dstolee@microsoft.com>
> ---
>     sparse-index: copy dir_hash in ensure_full_index()
>
>     This fix is an issue we discovered in our first experimental release of
>     the sparse index in the microsoft/git fork. We fixed it in the latest
>     experimental release [1] and then I almost forgot about it until we
>     started rebasing sparse-index work on top of the 2.33.0 release
>     candidates.
>
>     [1] https://github.com/microsoft/git/releases/tag/v2.32.0.vfs.0.102.exp
>
>     This is a change that can be taken anywhere since 4300f8 (sparse-index:
>     implement ensure_full_index(), 2021-03-30), but this version is based on
>     v2.33.0-rc2.
>
>     While the bug is alarming for users who hit it (seg fault) it requires
>     sufficient scale and use of the optional sparse index feature. We are
>     not recommending wide adoption of the sparse index yet because we don't
>     have a sufficient density of integrated commands. For that reason, I
>     don't think this should halt progress towards the full v2.33.0 release.
>     I did want to send this as soon as possible so that could be at the
>     discretion of the maintainer.
>
>     Thanks, -Stolee
>
> Published-As: https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git/releases/tag/pr-1017%2Fderrickstolee%2Fsparse-index%2Ffix-v1
> Fetch-It-Via: git fetch https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git pr-1017/derrickstolee/sparse-index/fix-v1
> Pull-Request: https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git/pull/1017
>
>  sparse-index.c | 1 +
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>
> diff --git a/sparse-index.c b/sparse-index.c
> index c6b4feec413..56eb65dc349 100644
> --- a/sparse-index.c
> +++ b/sparse-index.c
> @@ -283,6 +283,7 @@ void ensure_full_index(struct index_state *istate)
>
>  	/* Copy back into original index. */
>  	memcpy(&istate->name_hash, &full->name_hash, sizeof(full->name_hash));
> +	memcpy(&istate->dir_hash, &full->dir_hash, sizeof(full->dir_hash));
>  	istate->sparse_index = 0;
>  	free(istate->cache);
>  	istate->cache = full->cache;
>
> base-commit: 5d213e46bb7b880238ff5ea3914e940a50ae9369
> --
> gitgitgadget
>
>