David LinJul 27, 2026, 17:13 UTC on lore`bitmap_position()` only returns a negative value when an object is not present in the bitmap index.
In `find_objects()`, we have added a check in 11d45a6e6a to avoid processing a root whose reachability is already represented by the base bitmap, but accidentally uses `pos > 0`. Consequently, it never performs the membership test for an object at position zero.
If that object has an individual reachability bitmap, we unnecessarily load and OR that bitmap into the base again. Otherwise, we add the object to the not-mapped list, only for the subsequent pass to recognize that it is already present. The latter pass correctly treats all non-negative positions as valid, so this does not change the resulting object set, but an off-by-one edge case.
Treat position zero as valid by changing the condition to `pos >= 0`.
The existing pseudo-merge traversal test exercises this case. Its position-zero commit is presented through multiple roots. Before this change, each occurrence is counted as a bitmap hit; afterwards, only the first occurrence loads the bitmap. Assert the resulting hit count to cover the boundary condition.
Thanks in advance for the review!
Signed-off-by: David Lin <davidlin@stripe.com>
---
pack-bitmap.c | 2 +-
t/t5333-pseudo-merge-bitmaps.sh | 4 ++++
2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
Show changes to 2 files +5 −1
pack-bitmap.c, t/t5333-pseudo-merge-bitmaps.sh
diff --git a/pack-bitmap.c b/pack-bitmap.c
index d8dc4ae8d1..e85bd69ba4 100644
--- a/pack-bitmap.c
+++ b/pack-bitmap.c
@@ -1569,7 +1569,7 @@ static struct bitmap *find_objects(struct bitmap_index *bitmap_git,
if (base) {
int pos = bitmap_position(bitmap_git, &object->oid);
- if (pos > 0 && bitmap_get(base, pos)) {
+ if (pos >= 0 && bitmap_get(base, pos)) {
object->flags |= SEEN;
continue;
}
diff --git a/t/t5333-pseudo-merge-bitmaps.sh b/t/t5333-pseudo-merge-bitmaps.sh
index 305d677108..2a6c0e2318 100755
--- a/t/t5333-pseudo-merge-bitmaps.sh
+++ b/t/t5333-pseudo-merge-bitmaps.sh
@@ -85,6 +85,10 @@ test_expect_success 'bitmap traversal with pseudo-merges' '
test_pseudo_merges_satisfied 8 <trace2.txt &&
test_pseudo_merges_cascades 1 <trace2.txt &&
+
+ # Position zero is named by HEAD, its branch, and its tag, but its
+ # bitmap should only be loaded once.
+ test_trace2_data bitmap bitmap/hits 1 <trace2.txt &&
test_cmp expect actual
'
base-commit: 9a0c4701dcd5725c4184599322b52933ff5005ca
--
2.54.0
Re: [PATCH] pack-bitmap: handle objects at bitmap position zero
On Mon, Jul 27, 2026 at 01:13:31PM -0400, David Lin wrote:
> In `find_objects()`, we have added a check in 11d45a6e6a to avoid
> processing a root whose reachability is already represented by the
> base bitmap, but accidentally uses `pos > 0`. Consequently, it never
> performs the membership test for an object at position zero.
Makes sense. The commit message here and below looks reasonable, but please wrap it at a maximum of 72 characters per line.
Show 6 quoted lines
> If that object has an individual reachability bitmap, we unnecessarily
> load and OR that bitmap into the base again. Otherwise, we add the
> object to the not-mapped list, only for the subsequent pass to
> recognize that it is already present. The latter pass correctly treats
> all non-negative positions as valid, so this does not change the
> resulting object set, but an off-by-one edge case.
At this point, "load" is a fairly cheap operation. We have already loaded the bits off of disk in a previous step. If the bitmap was stored as an XOR against a neighbor, we have already XOR'd it against that neighbor and stored the result.
More importantly, you're right that this does not change the result we get from the bitmap machinery. `find_objects()` works as follows:
1. We first start with a "roots_bitmap" (which is non-zero *only* in
the positions specified by the given "roots", and *not* their
reachability closure). 2. We then apply pseudo-merges to that bitmap of roots, OR-ing that
into the "base" bitmap if we were able to apply a non-zero amount of
pseudo-merge bitamps. 3. We then loop over all supplied "roots". If we have a "base" bitmap,
we try and mark the given root as SEEN if its corresponding bit
position is set. If it isn't, then we try and call the function
`add_commit_to_bitmap()`, which ORs in a stored bitmap to "base". 4. Finally, if that fails, mark the object as `not_mapped`.
So in the case there are pseudo-merge bitmaps, and if one of our supplied "roots" is stored at bit position zero, then we will only fall through to the `add_commit_to_bitmap()` case (incrementing the "hit" count further than necessary), but othewrise marking the object as SEEN and continuing. This also sets "existing_bitmaps", which involves one extra pseudo-merge cascade.
In the case where there aren't any pseudo-merge bitmaps, the reasoning is similar, except that we must have (a) at least one "root" which has a stored bitmap, and (b) that we see the root at bit position zero *after* one or more stored bitmaps. Note that (a) and (b) can refer to the same root here, so something like:
$ git rev-list --objects --use-bitmap-index HEAD HEAD
should do the trick.
> Treat position zero as valid by changing the condition to `pos >= 0`.
I briefly wondered whether other callers of `bitmap_position()` would have similar issues. There are a total of twelve `bitmap_position()` callers, and all of them except the one in this patch handle the return value correctly.
As an aside, we could consider doing something like changing the return value of `bitmap_position()` to indicate non-zero on failure, and zero on success, and fills the result through a uint32_t pointer. I roughed this out locally, but the patch is mostly noisy and not really worth sending.
The important part of the change is the following:
--- 8< ---
Show changes to pack-bitmap.c +22 −16
diff --git a/pack-bitmap.c b/pack-bitmap.c
index d8dc4ae8d1..4e86aa15dd 100644
--- a/pack-bitmap.c
+++ b/pack-bitmap.c
@@ -1064,7 +1064,8 @@ struct ewah_bitmap *bitmap_for_commit(struct bitmap_index *bitmap_git,
}
static inline int bitmap_position_extended(struct bitmap_index *bitmap_git,
- const struct object_id *oid)
+ const struct object_id *oid,
+ uint32_t *bitmap_pos)
{
kh_oid_pos_t *positions = bitmap_git->ext_index.positions;
khiter_t pos = kh_get_oid_pos(positions, *oid);
@@ -1078,39 +1079,44 @@ static inline int bitmap_position_extended(struct bitmap_index *bitmap_git,
}
static inline int bitmap_position_packfile(struct bitmap_index *bitmap_git,
- const struct object_id *oid)
+ const struct object_id *oid,
+ uint32_t *bitmap_pos)
{
- uint32_t pos;
off_t offset = find_pack_entry_one(oid, bitmap_git->pack);
+
if (!offset)
return -1;
- if (offset_to_pack_pos(bitmap_git->pack, offset, &pos) < 0)
- return -1;
- return pos;
+ return offset_to_pack_pos(bitmap_git->pack, offset, bitmap_pos);
}
static int bitmap_position_midx(struct bitmap_index *bitmap_git,
- const struct object_id *oid)
+ const struct object_id *oid,
+ uint32_t *bitmap_pos)
{
- uint32_t want, got;
+ uint32_t want;
+
if (!bsearch_midx(oid, bitmap_git->midx, &want))
return -1;
- if (midx_to_pack_pos(bitmap_git->midx, want, &got) < 0)
- return -1;
- return got;
+ return midx_to_pack_pos(bitmap_git->midx, want, bitmap_pos);
}
static int bitmap_position(struct bitmap_index *bitmap_git,
- const struct object_id *oid)
+ const struct object_id *oid,
+ uint32_t *bitmap_pos)
{
- int pos;
+ int ret;
+
if (bitmap_is_midx(bitmap_git))
- pos = bitmap_position_midx(bitmap_git, oid);
+ ret = bitmap_position_midx(bitmap_git, oid, bitmap_pos);
else
- pos = bitmap_position_packfile(bitmap_git, oid);
- return (pos >= 0) ? pos : bitmap_position_extended(bitmap_git, oid);
+ ret = bitmap_position_packfile(bitmap_git, oid, bitmap_pos);
+
+ if (!ret)
+ return 0;
+
+ return bitmap_position_extended(bitmap_git, oid, bitmap_pos);
}
static int ext_index_add_object(struct bitmap_index *bitmap_git,
--- >8 ---
> The existing pseudo-merge traversal test exercises this case. Its
> position-zero commit is presented through multiple roots. Before this
> change, each occurrence is counted as a bitmap hit; afterwards, only
> the first occurrence loads the bitmap. Assert the resulting hit count
> to cover the boundary condition.
Exactly.
> diff --git a/pack-bitmap.c b/pack-bitmap.c
> index d8dc4ae8d1..e85bd69ba4 100644
> --- a/pack-bitmap.c
> +++ b/pack-bitmap.c
> @@ -1569,7 +1569,7 @@ static struct bitmap *find_objects(struct bitmap_index *bitmap_git,
>
> if (base) {
> int pos = bitmap_position(bitmap_git, &object->oid);
> - if (pos > 0 && bitmap_get(base, pos)) {
> + if (pos >= 0 && bitmap_get(base, pos)) {
OK, this is obviously good.
> diff --git a/t/t5333-pseudo-merge-bitmaps.sh b/t/t5333-pseudo-merge-bitmaps.sh
> index 305d677108..2a6c0e2318 100755
> --- a/t/t5333-pseudo-merge-bitmaps.sh
> +++ b/t/t5333-pseudo-merge-bitmaps.sh
> @@ -85,6 +85,10 @@ test_expect_success 'bitmap traversal with pseudo-merges' '
>
> test_pseudo_merges_satisfied 8 <trace2.txt &&
> test_pseudo_merges_cascades 1 <trace2.txt &&
> +
> + # Position zero is named by HEAD, its branch, and its tag, but its
> + # bitmap should only be loaded once.
> + test_trace2_data bitmap bitmap/hits 1 <trace2.txt &&
> test_cmp expect actual
> '
This is good, though it is a little bit fragile in the sense that we
rely on the pack ordering to place HEAD as the first object in the pack.
I'm comfortable with it given the comment, which effectively documents
that fragility.
However, I think it's worth covering the non-pseudo-merge case as I
described above, too.
Thanks,
Taylor
Re: [PATCH] pack-bitmap: handle objects at bitmap position zero
On Mon, Jul 27, 2026 at 03:05:27PM -0500, Taylor Blau wrote:
> Makes sense. The commit message here and below looks reasonable, but
> please wrap it at a maximum of 72 characters per line.
Done in v2, apologize for the formatting.
> At this point, "load" is a fairly cheap operation. We have already
> loaded the bits off of disk in a previous step. If the bitmap was
> stored as an XOR against a neighbor, we have already XOR'd it against
> that neighbor and stored the result.
Agree, I reworded the commit message/comment to consolidate the wording, so that a duplicate disk read is not always implied.
> However, I think it's worth covering the non-pseudo-merge case as I
> described above, too.
Good call, and thank you for the expanded explanation above, added in v2 using a duplicate `HEAD` traversal, as suggested.
Thanks again for the detailed review. I will send v2 shortly.
Best, David
[PATCH v2] pack-bitmap: handle objects at bitmap position zero
`bitmap_position()` only returns a negative value when an object is not present in the bitmap index.
In `find_objects()`, we have added a check (11d45a6e6a) to avoid processing a root whose reachability is already represented by the base bitmap, but accidentally uses `pos > 0`. Consequently, it never performs the membership test for an object at position zero.
If that object has an individual reachability bitmap, we unnecessarily OR that bitmap into the base again. Otherwise, we add the object to the not-mapped list, only for the subsequent pass to recognize that it is already present. The latter pass correctly treats all non-negative positions as valid, so this does not change the resulting object set, but an off-by-one edge case.
Treat position zero as valid by changing the condition to `pos >= 0`.
The existing pseudo-merge traversal test exercises this case. Its position-zero commit is presented through multiple roots. Before this change, each occurrence is counted as a bitmap hit; afterwards, only the first occurrence is counted. Assert the resulting hit count to cover the boundary condition.
Also cover the non-pseudo-merge case by passing `HEAD` twice. The first occurrence initializes the base from its stored bitmap, and the second must recognize that position zero is already present.
Helped-by: Taylor Blau <ttaylorr@openai.com>
Signed-off-by: David Lin <davidlin@stripe.com>
---
Changes since v1:
- Clarify the bitmap disk load wordings.
- Add coverage for the non-pseudo-merge case.
pack-bitmap.c | 2 +-
t/t5333-pseudo-merge-bitmaps.sh | 14 +++++++++++++-
2 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
Show changes to 2 files +14 −2
pack-bitmap.c, t/t5333-pseudo-merge-bitmaps.sh
diff --git a/pack-bitmap.c b/pack-bitmap.c
index d8dc4ae8d1..e85bd69ba4 100644
--- a/pack-bitmap.c
+++ b/pack-bitmap.c
@@ -1569,7 +1569,7 @@ static struct bitmap *find_objects(struct bitmap_index *bitmap_git,
if (base) {
int pos = bitmap_position(bitmap_git, &object->oid);
- if (pos > 0 && bitmap_get(base, pos)) {
+ if (pos >= 0 && bitmap_get(base, pos)) {
object->flags |= SEEN;
continue;
}
diff --git a/t/t5333-pseudo-merge-bitmaps.sh b/t/t5333-pseudo-merge-bitmaps.sh
index 305d677108..5b2a17f90a 100755
--- a/t/t5333-pseudo-merge-bitmaps.sh
+++ b/t/t5333-pseudo-merge-bitmaps.sh
@@ -50,7 +50,15 @@ test_expect_success 'bitmap traversal without pseudo-merges' '
test_pseudo_merges_cascades 0 <trace2.txt &&
test_pseudo_merges >merges &&
test_must_be_empty merges &&
- test_cmp expect actual
+ test_cmp expect actual &&
+
+ : >trace2.txt &&
+ GIT_TRACE2_EVENT=$PWD/trace2.txt \
+ git rev-list --objects --use-bitmap-index HEAD HEAD >/dev/null &&
+
+ # The first HEAD initializes base from its position-zero bitmap. The
+ # duplicate root should not count as another bitmap hit.
+ test_trace2_data bitmap bitmap/hits 1 <trace2.txt
'
test_expect_success 'pseudo-merges accurately represent their objects' '
@@ -85,6 +93,10 @@ test_expect_success 'bitmap traversal with pseudo-merges' '
test_pseudo_merges_satisfied 8 <trace2.txt &&
test_pseudo_merges_cascades 1 <trace2.txt &&
+
+ # Position zero is named by HEAD, its branch, and its tag, but it
+ # should count as only one bitmap hit.
+ test_trace2_data bitmap bitmap/hits 1 <trace2.txt &&
test_cmp expect actual
'
base-commit: 9a0c4701dcd5725c4184599322b52933ff5005ca
--
2.54.0