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

Re: [PATCH v2] send-pack: run GPG after atomic push checking

From
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date
Sep 19, 2020, 00:02 UTC
Message-ID
<xmqqft7eljkz.fsf@gitster.c.googlers.com>
In-Reply-To
<20200918045052.13022-1-hanxin.hx@alibaba-inc.com>
Han Xin <chiyutianyi@gmail.com> writes:
Show 7 quoted lines
> The refs update commands can be sent to the server side in two different
> ways: GPG-signed or unsigned.  We should run these two operations in the
> same "Finally, tell the other end!" code block, but they are seperated
> by the "Clear the status for each ref" code block.  This will result in
> a slight performance loss, because the failed atomic push will still
> perform unnecessary preparations for shallow advertise and GPG-signed
> commands buffers.

I am not sure if that is a good justification for this patch. In the context of a push that involves GPG signature, preparation of the buffer contents to be signed can hardly be the performance bottleneck.

Also, this change, if sold solely on the basis of performance, is optimizing for the wrong case of the user _failing_ to propose a push that is atomic.

The true value I see in this change is that the user won't have to be bothered by the (possible) GPG passphrase input when there is nothing to sign. Let's sell the change as such instead.

> Add a new test case to t5534 to ensure GPG will not be called when the
> GPG-signed atomic push fails.

As I mentioned in the previous round of the review, I am not sure if it is wise to expect that the exact phrasing of error messages like "atomic push failed" and "non-fast-forward" to stay constant and the output format of the "git push" to stay exactly the same in this test.

Wouldn't it be more robust to grep for a message that emitted from the error codepath in sign_buffer(), e.g. "gpg failed to sign", in order to ensure absense of the sign that GPG were attempted?

The replacement test I have in mind would look like the attached.
Thanks.
diff --git a/t/t5534-push-signed.sh b/t/t5534-push-signed.sh
index 030331f1c5..3eb3642abb 100755
--- a/t/t5534-push-signed.sh
+++ b/t/t5534-push-signed.sh
@@ -273,4 +273,17 @@ test_expect_success GPGSM 'fail without key and heed user.signingkey x509' '
 	test_cmp expect dst/push-cert-status
 '
 
+test_expect_success GPG 'failed atomic push does not execute GPG' '
+	prepare_dst &&
+	git -C dst config receive.certnonceseed sekrit &&
+	write_script gpg <<-EOF &&
+	# should check atomic push locally before running GPG.
+	exit 1
+	EOF
+	test_must_fail env PATH="$TRASH_DIRECTORY:$PATH" git push \
+			--signed --atomic --porcelain \
+			dst noop ff noff >out 2>&1 &&
+	test_i18ngrep ! "gpg failed to sign" out
+'
+
 test_done
Previous: Han XinNext: Han Xin
Message 11 of 17 in “t5534: new test case for atomic signed push”
  1. 1/2 t5534: new test case for atomic signed pushHan Xin, Sep 15, 2020
  2. 2/2 send-pack: check atomic push before running GPGHan Xin, Sep 15, 2020
  3. Junio C HamanoSep 15, 2020
  4. Junio C HamanoSep 15, 2020
  5. Jiang XinSep 16, 2020
  6. Junio C HamanoSep 16, 2020
  7. 韩欣(炽天)Sep 16, 2020
  8. Jiang XinSep 16, 2020
  9. Junio C HamanoSep 16, 2020
  10. send-pack: run GPG after atomic push checkingHan Xin, Sep 18, 2020
  11. Junio C HamanoSep 19, 2020
  12. send-pack: run GPG after atomic push checkingHan Xin, Sep 19, 2020
  13. Junio C HamanoSep 19, 2020
  14. send-pack: run GPG after atomic push checkingHan Xin, Sep 20, 2020
  15. Junio C HamanoSep 15, 2020
  16. brian m. carlsonSep 16, 2020
  17. Junio C HamanoSep 15, 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.