| Message ID | 20190215164237.12250-1-max@max630.net (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | t5562: do not depend on /dev/zero | expand |
On February 15, 2019 11:43, Max Kirillov wrote: > It was reported [1] that NonStop platform does not have /dev/zero. > > The test uses /dev/zero as a dummy input. Passing case (http-backed failed > because of too big input size) should not be reading anything from it. If http- > backend would erroneously try to read any data returning EOF probably > would be even safer than providing some meaningless data. > > Replace /dev/zero with /dev/null to avoid issues with platforms which do not > have /dev/zero. > > [1] https://public-inbox.org/git/20190209185930.5256-4- > randall.s.becker@rogers.com/ > > Reported-by: Randall S. Becker <rsbecker@nexbridge.com> > Signed-off-by: Max Kirillov <max@max630.net> > --- > By the way, I don't think this requires such sofisticated fix. In the success > case the input would not be read at all. > You could replace it with /dev/null, the in failure (not immediate fail) git > would fail due to truncated input or something. > > Also, as you experience hang issue [2] in earlier tests, this one should not > have contributed to it. > > [2] https://public- > inbox.org/git/001901d4c22b$194bfe60$4be3fb20$@nexbridge.com/ > t/t5562-http-backend-content-length.sh | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/t/t5562-http-backend-content-length.sh b/t/t5562-http-backend- > content-length.sh > index 90d890d02f..436c261c86 100755 > --- a/t/t5562-http-backend-content-length.sh > +++ b/t/t5562-http-backend-content-length.sh > @@ -150,7 +150,7 @@ test_expect_success 'CONTENT_LENGTH overflow > ssite_t' ' > GIT_HTTP_EXPORT_ALL=TRUE \ > REQUEST_METHOD=POST \ > CONTENT_LENGTH="$NOT_FIT_IN_SSIZE" \ > - git http-backend </dev/zero >/dev/null 2>err && > + git http-backend </dev/null >/dev/null 2>err && > grep "fatal:.*CONTENT_LENGTH" err FTR, this particular subtest is not the one that is hanging. This subtest passes on NonStop with any and all (now) 4 solutions that have been floating around. Cheers, Randall
"Randall S. Becker" <rsbecker@nexbridge.com> writes: > FTR, this particular subtest is not the one that is hanging. This subtest > passes on NonStop with any and all (now) 4 solutions that have been floating > around. One thing I'd like to know more is if this test passes on NonStop with this patch, i.e. /dev/zero replaced with /dev/null. Thanks.
On February 15, 2019 13:01, Junio C Hamano wrote: > To: Randall S. Becker <rsbecker@nexbridge.com> > Cc: 'Max Kirillov' <max@max630.net>; git@vger.kernel.org; 'Johannes > Schindelin' <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> > Subject: Re: [PATCH] t5562: do not depend on /dev/zero > > "Randall S. Becker" <rsbecker@nexbridge.com> writes: > > > FTR, this particular subtest is not the one that is hanging. This > > subtest passes on NonStop with any and all (now) 4 solutions that have > > been floating around. > > One thing I'd like to know more is if this test passes on NonStop with this > patch, i.e. /dev/zero replaced with /dev/null. Yes, this particular subtest passes replacing /dev/null. The other three subtests still hang. This subtest never did.
"Randall S. Becker" <rsbecker@nexbridge.com> writes: > On February 15, 2019 13:01, Junio C Hamano wrote: >> To: Randall S. Becker <rsbecker@nexbridge.com> >> Cc: 'Max Kirillov' <max@max630.net>; git@vger.kernel.org; 'Johannes >> Schindelin' <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> >> Subject: Re: [PATCH] t5562: do not depend on /dev/zero >> >> "Randall S. Becker" <rsbecker@nexbridge.com> writes: >> >> > FTR, this particular subtest is not the one that is hanging. This >> > subtest passes on NonStop with any and all (now) 4 solutions that have >> > been floating around. >> >> One thing I'd like to know more is if this test passes on NonStop with > this >> patch, i.e. /dev/zero replaced with /dev/null. > > Yes, this particular subtest passes replacing /dev/null. The other three > subtests still hang. This subtest never did. Thanks.
diff --git a/t/t5562-http-backend-content-length.sh b/t/t5562-http-backend-content-length.sh index 90d890d02f..436c261c86 100755 --- a/t/t5562-http-backend-content-length.sh +++ b/t/t5562-http-backend-content-length.sh @@ -150,7 +150,7 @@ test_expect_success 'CONTENT_LENGTH overflow ssite_t' ' GIT_HTTP_EXPORT_ALL=TRUE \ REQUEST_METHOD=POST \ CONTENT_LENGTH="$NOT_FIT_IN_SSIZE" \ - git http-backend </dev/zero >/dev/null 2>err && + git http-backend </dev/null >/dev/null 2>err && grep "fatal:.*CONTENT_LENGTH" err '
It was reported [1] that NonStop platform does not have /dev/zero. The test uses /dev/zero as a dummy input. Passing case (http-backed failed because of too big input size) should not be reading anything from it. If http-backend would erroneously try to read any data returning EOF probably would be even safer than providing some meaningless data. Replace /dev/zero with /dev/null to avoid issues with platforms which do not have /dev/zero. [1] https://public-inbox.org/git/20190209185930.5256-4-randall.s.becker@rogers.com/ Reported-by: Randall S. Becker <rsbecker@nexbridge.com> Signed-off-by: Max Kirillov <max@max630.net> --- By the way, I don't think this requires such sofisticated fix. In the success case the input would not be read at all. You could replace it with /dev/null, the in failure (not immediate fail) git would fail due to truncated input or something. Also, as you experience hang issue [2] in earlier tests, this one should not have contributed to it. [2] https://public-inbox.org/git/001901d4c22b$194bfe60$4be3fb20$@nexbridge.com/ t/t5562-http-backend-content-length.sh | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)