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

Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] merge-recursive: fix the refresh logic in update_file_flags

From
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date
Feb 19, 2020, 18:40 UTC
Message-ID
<xmqq4kvmfmjy.fsf@gitster-ct.c.googlers.com>
In-Reply-To
<ba297fd67bb98bd06408241030cf42f410d5d366.1582131847.git.gitgitgadget@gmail.com>
"Elijah Newren via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@gmail.com> writes:
Show 33 quoted lines
> From: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
>
> If we need to delete a higher stage entry in the index to place the file
> at stage 0, then we'll lose that file's stat information.  In such
> situations we may still be able to detect that the file on disk is the
> version we want (as noted by our comment in the code:
>   /* do not overwrite file if already present */
> ), but we do still need to update the mtime since we are creating a new
> cache_entry for that file.  Update the logic used to determine whether
> we refresh a file's mtime.
>
> Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
> ---
>  merge-recursive.c                    | 7 +++++--
>  t/t3433-rebase-across-mode-change.sh | 2 +-
>  2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/merge-recursive.c b/merge-recursive.c
> index aee1769a7ac..e6f943c5ccc 100644
> --- a/merge-recursive.c
> +++ b/merge-recursive.c
> @@ -998,10 +998,13 @@ static int update_file_flags(struct merge_options *opt,
>  		free(buf);
>  	}
>  update_index:
> -	if (!ret && update_cache)
> -		if (add_cacheinfo(opt, contents, path, 0, update_wd,
> +	if (!ret && update_cache) {
> +		int refresh = (!opt->priv->call_depth &&
> +			       contents->mode != S_IFGITLINK);
> +		if (add_cacheinfo(opt, contents, path, 0, refresh,
>  				  ADD_CACHE_OK_TO_ADD))
>  			return -1;

Hmph, !.call_depth would avoid resetting update_wd to 0, so the only difference this patch makes is when the caller of this helper passed (update_wd == 0) during the outermost merge. We did not tell add_cacheinfo() to refresh, and refresh_cache_entry() was not called. But the new code forces refresh to happen for normal entries. The proposed log message explains that a refresh is needed for a new cache entry, but if I am reading the code correctly, this function is called with !update_wd from two places, one of which is the "Adding %s" /* do not overwrite ... */ the log message mentions.

But the other one? When both sides added identically, we do have an up-to-date result on our side already, so shouldn't we avoid forcing update_wd in that case?

I do not think passing refresh==1 in that case will produce an incorrect result, but doesn't it force an unnecessary refreshing?

Puzzled.
Show 17 quoted lines
> +	}
>  	return ret;
>  }
>  
> diff --git a/t/t3433-rebase-across-mode-change.sh b/t/t3433-rebase-across-mode-change.sh
> index f11fc35c3ee..05df964670f 100755
> --- a/t/t3433-rebase-across-mode-change.sh
> +++ b/t/t3433-rebase-across-mode-change.sh
> @@ -33,7 +33,7 @@ test_expect_success 'rebase changes with the apply backend' '
>  	git rebase side1
>  '
>  
> -test_expect_failure 'rebase changes with the merge backend' '
> +test_expect_success 'rebase changes with the merge backend' '
>  	test_when_finished "git rebase --abort || true" &&
>  	git checkout -b merge-backend side2 &&
>  	git rebase -m side1
Previous: Elijah Newren via GitGitGadgetNext: Elijah Newren
Message 17 of 20 in “t3424: new rebase testcase documenting a stat-dirty-like failure”
  1. t3424: new rebase testcase documenting a stat-dirty-like failureElijah Newren via GitGitGadget, Feb 17, 2020
  2. Elijah NewrenFeb 17, 2020
  3. Phillip WoodFeb 18, 2020
  4. Elijah NewrenFeb 18, 2020
  5. Phillip WoodFeb 19, 2020
  6. Elijah NewrenFeb 19, 2020
  7. Junio C HamanoFeb 19, 2020
  8. Phillip WoodFeb 19, 2020
  9. Johannes SchindelinFeb 18, 2020
  10. Elijah NewrenFeb 18, 2020
  11. t3424: new rebase testcase documenting a stat-dirty-like failureElijah Newren via GitGitGadget, Feb 18, 2020
  12. Junio C HamanoFeb 18, 2020
  13. Elijah NewrenFeb 18, 2020
  14. t3433: new rebase testcase documenting a stat-dirty-like failureElijah Newren via GitGitGadget, Feb 18, 2020
  15. 0/2 t3433: new rebase testcase documenting a stat-dirty-like failureElijah Newren via GitGitGadget, Feb 19, 2020
  16. 2/2 merge-recursive: fix the refresh logic in update_file_flagsElijah Newren via GitGitGadget, Feb 19, 2020
  17. Junio C HamanoFeb 19, 2020
  18. Elijah NewrenFeb 19, 2020
  19. Junio C HamanoFeb 19, 2020
  20. 1/2 t3433: new rebase testcase documenting a stat-dirty-like failureElijah Newren via GitGitGadget, Feb 19, 2020

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.