Re: [PATCH v2 3/4] bisect--helper: reimplement `bisect_run` shell function in C

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Apr 7, 2021, 22:09 UTC
Message-ID: <xmqqeeflycf9.fsf@gitster.g>
In-Reply-To: <20210407173334.68222-4-mirucam@gmail.com>

Miriam Rubio <mirucam@gmail.com> writes:

Show 9 quoted lines

> From: Tanushree Tumane <tanushreetumane@gmail.com>
>
> Reimplement the `bisect_run()` shell function
> in C and also add `--bisect-run` subcommand to
> `git bisect--helper` to call it from git-bisect.sh.
>
> Mentored-by: Christian Couder <chriscool@tuxfamily.org>
> Signed-off-by: Tanushree Tumane <tanushreetumane@gmail.com>
> Signed-off-by: Miriam Rubio <mirucam@gmail.com>

If I am reading the patch correctly, this removes the need for the $GIT_DIR/BISECT_RUN file that used to be used to keep track of the state? If that is true, it is worth noting in the proposed log message.

As far as I can see, nobody creates $GIT_DIR/BISECT_RUN anymore.

    $ git grep -e path_bisect_run -e BISECT_RUN
    bisect.c:static GIT_PATH_FUNC(git_path_bisect_run, "BISECT_RUN")
    bisect.c:	unlink_or_warn(git_path_bisect_run());
    builtin/bisect--helper.c:		BISECT_RUN,
    builtin/bisect--helper.c:			 N_("use <cmd>... to automatical...
    builtin/bisect--helper.c:	case BISECT_RUN:
    t/t6030-bisect-porcelain.sh:	test_path_is_missing ".git/BISECT_RUN" &&

What if a run script tried to read from (or checked the presence of) the file for its correct operation (e.g. I would imagine that "do this operation when run interactively, but do the same operation silently when run from the git-bisect machinery" may be a reasonable thing to do)?

This change just unintendedly broke such a script, didn't it? The change makes me a bit worried.

Show 16 quoted lines

> +	if (bisect_next_check(terms, NULL))
> +		return BISECT_FAILED;
> +
> +	if (argc)
> +		sq_quote_argv(&command, argv);
> +	else
> +		return BISECT_FAILED;
> +
> +	run_args.v[0] = xstrdup(command.buf);
> +	run_args.nr = 1;
> +
> +	while (1) {
> +		strvec_clear(&args);
> +
> +		printf(_("running %s"), command.buf);
> +		res = run_command_v_opt(run_args.v, RUN_USING_SHELL);

Nicely used sq_quote_argv() with RUN_USING_SHELL here.  Goodl.

Show 14 quoted lines

> +		if (res < 0 && res >= 128) {
> +			error(_("bisect run failed: exit code %d from"
> +				" '%s' is < 0 or >= 128"), res, command.buf);
> +			strbuf_release(&command);
> +			return res;
> +		}
> +
> +		if (res == 125)
> +			strvec_push(&args, "skip");
> +		else if (res > 0)
> +			strvec_push(&args, terms->term_bad);
> +		else
> +			strvec_push(&args, terms->term_good);
> +

bisect_state() does so much that it was a bit hard to follow for me (who hasn't been following the bisect-in-C topic very closely), but the code around here roughly corresponds to the following snippet in the original scripted version.

Show 11 quoted lines

> -		git bisect--helper --bisect-state $state >"$GIT_DIR/BISECT_RUN"
> -		res=$?
> -
> -		cat "$GIT_DIR/BISECT_RUN"
> -
> -		if sane_grep "first $TERM_BAD commit could be any of" "$GIT_DIR/BISECT_RUN" \
> -			>/dev/null
> -		then
> -			gettextln "bisect run cannot continue any more" >&2
> -			exit $res
> -		fi

I see that the contents of the file BISECT_RUN is shown to the user in the original but is that part of what bisect_state() does, or did we lose it during this round of conversion?

Show 11 quoted lines

> +		res = bisect_state(terms, args.v, args.nr);
> +		if (res == BISECT_INTERNAL_SUCCESS_MERGE_BASE) {
> +			printf(_("bisect run success"));
> +			res = BISECT_OK;
> +		} else if (res == BISECT_ONLY_SKIPPED_LEFT)
> +			error(_("bisect run cannot continue any more"));
> +		else if (res)
> +			error(_("bisect run failed:'git bisect--helper --bisect-state"
> +				" %s' exited with error code %d"), args.v[0], res);
> +		else
> +			continue;

In any case, being able to check the return value from bisect_state() and switch is so much nicer than having to sane_grep in BISECT_RUN.

Show 18 quoted lines

> +		strbuf_release(&command);
> +		strvec_clear(&args);
> +		strvec_clear(&run_args);
> +
> +		return res;
> +	}
> +}
> +
>  int cmd_bisect__helper(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix)
>  {
>  	enum {
> @@ -1086,7 +1146,8 @@ int cmd_bisect__helper(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix)
>  		BISECT_LOG,
>  		BISECT_REPLAY,
>  		BISECT_SKIP,
> -		BISECT_VISUALIZE
> +		BISECT_VISUALIZE,
> +		BISECT_RUN,

Now this new one has the trailing comma. I'd suggest doing so in the previous step.

Thanks.