| Message ID | 20191205235704.31385-3-alext9@gmail.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | rebase: fix bug in --fork-point | expand |
Hi Alex, On Thu, Dec 05, 2019 at 06:57:04PM -0500, Alex Torok wrote: > rebase --fork-point needs to look up the full ref name before calling > get_fork_point in the same manner that merge-base --fork-point does. > > Signed-off-by: Alex Torok <alext9@gmail.com> > --- > builtin/rebase.c | 4 +++- > t/t3431-rebase-fork-point.sh | 1 + > 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/builtin/rebase.c b/builtin/rebase.c > index e755087b0f..821994f676 100644 > --- a/builtin/rebase.c > +++ b/builtin/rebase.c > @@ -1980,8 +1980,10 @@ int cmd_rebase(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix) > struct commit *head = > lookup_commit_reference(the_repository, > &options.orig_head); > + char * full_name; nit: * should be attached to the variable name. > + dwim_ref_or_die(options.upstream_name, strlen(options.upstream_name), &full_name); Also, thinking about this more, would it be possible to put the dwim_ref logic into get_fork_point() directly? There are currently only these two callers so I suspect it should be fine and it'll result in cleaner logic. We could also squash it down into one patch. > options.restrict_revision = > - get_fork_point(options.upstream_name, head); > + get_fork_point(full_name, head); > } > > if (repo_read_index(the_repository) < 0) > diff --git a/t/t3431-rebase-fork-point.sh b/t/t3431-rebase-fork-point.sh > index 78851b9a2a..6ecdae918e 100755 > --- a/t/t3431-rebase-fork-point.sh > +++ b/t/t3431-rebase-fork-point.sh > @@ -49,6 +49,7 @@ test_rebase 'G F C D B A' --no-fork-point --onto D > test_rebase 'G F C B A' --no-fork-point --keep-base > test_rebase 'G F E D B A' --fork-point refs/heads/master > test_rebase 'G F D B A' --fork-point --onto D refs/heads/master > +test_rebase 'G F D B A' --fork-point --onto D master It's not obvious why this was failing in the first place. Perhaps we could document it better in the commit message? Maybe something like: We used to pass in the upstream_name directly into the get_fork_point() machinery. However, get_fork_point() was expecting a fully qualified ref name even though most users use the short name for branches. This resulted in `--fork-point` not working as expected since, without the full ref name, the reflog lookup would fail and it would behave as if we weren't passing in `--fork-point` at all. Also, I'm not why this test case in particular that was duplicated (and not the one above) given that the first three `--fork-point` test cases fail without the change to rebase. Perhaps we want to duplicate all "refs/heads/master" tests with a corresponding "master" test? Thanks, Denton > test_rebase 'G F B A' --fork-point --keep-base refs/heads/master > test_rebase 'G F C E D B A' refs/heads/master > test_rebase 'G F C D B A' --onto D refs/heads/master > -- > 2.17.1 >
Hi Alex Thanks for working on this On 06/12/2019 01:48, Denton Liu wrote: > Hi Alex, > > On Thu, Dec 05, 2019 at 06:57:04PM -0500, Alex Torok wrote: >> rebase --fork-point needs to look up the full ref name before calling >> get_fork_point in the same manner that merge-base --fork-point does. >> >> Signed-off-by: Alex Torok <alext9@gmail.com> >> --- >> builtin/rebase.c | 4 +++- >> t/t3431-rebase-fork-point.sh | 1 + >> 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/builtin/rebase.c b/builtin/rebase.c >> index e755087b0f..821994f676 100644 >> --- a/builtin/rebase.c >> +++ b/builtin/rebase.c >> @@ -1980,8 +1980,10 @@ int cmd_rebase(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix) >> struct commit *head = >> lookup_commit_reference(the_repository, >> &options.orig_head); >> + char * full_name; > > nit: * should be attached to the variable name. I think you also need to free it once you've called get_fork_point() as well. > >> + dwim_ref_or_die(options.upstream_name, strlen(options.upstream_name), &full_name); > > Also, thinking about this more, would it be possible to put the dwim_ref > logic into get_fork_point() directly? There are currently only these two > callers so I suspect it should be fine and it'll result in cleaner > logic. If you do that then it would be better to use error() rather than die() in get_fork_point() and return an error to the caller as we try to avoid adding code to libgit that dies. This lets the caller handle any cleanup that they need to before exiting. Best Wishes Phillip > > We could also squash it down into one patch. > >> options.restrict_revision = >> - get_fork_point(options.upstream_name, head); >> + get_fork_point(full_name, head); >> } >> >> if (repo_read_index(the_repository) < 0) >> diff --git a/t/t3431-rebase-fork-point.sh b/t/t3431-rebase-fork-point.sh >> index 78851b9a2a..6ecdae918e 100755 >> --- a/t/t3431-rebase-fork-point.sh >> +++ b/t/t3431-rebase-fork-point.sh >> @@ -49,6 +49,7 @@ test_rebase 'G F C D B A' --no-fork-point --onto D >> test_rebase 'G F C B A' --no-fork-point --keep-base >> test_rebase 'G F E D B A' --fork-point refs/heads/master >> test_rebase 'G F D B A' --fork-point --onto D refs/heads/master >> +test_rebase 'G F D B A' --fork-point --onto D master > > It's not obvious why this was failing in the first place. Perhaps we > could document it better in the commit message? > > Maybe something like: > > We used to pass in the upstream_name directly into the > get_fork_point() machinery. However, get_fork_point() was > expecting a fully qualified ref name even though most users use > the short name for branches. This resulted in `--fork-point` not > working as expected since, without the full ref name, the reflog > lookup would fail and it would behave as if we weren't passing > in `--fork-point` at all. > > Also, I'm not why this test case in particular that was duplicated (and > not the one above) given that the first three `--fork-point` test cases > fail without the change to rebase. Perhaps we want to duplicate all > "refs/heads/master" tests with a corresponding "master" test? > > Thanks, > > Denton > >> test_rebase 'G F B A' --fork-point --keep-base refs/heads/master >> test_rebase 'G F C E D B A' refs/heads/master >> test_rebase 'G F C D B A' --onto D refs/heads/master >> -- >> 2.17.1 >>
Thank you for the feedback Denton & Phillip! On Fri, Dec 6, 2019 at 5:52 AM Phillip Wood <phillip.wood123@gmail.com> wrote: > On 06/12/2019 01:48, Denton Liu wrote: > > nit: * should be attached to the variable name. > > I think you also need to free it once you've called get_fork_point() as > well. Yup. Got it. > On 06/12/2019 01:48, Denton Liu wrote: > > > >> + dwim_ref_or_die(options.upstream_name, strlen(options.upstream_name), &full_name); > > > > Also, thinking about this more, would it be possible to put the dwim_ref > > logic into get_fork_point() directly? There are currently only these two > > callers so I suspect it should be fine and it'll result in cleaner > > logic. > > If you do that then it would be better to use error() rather than die() > in get_fork_point() and return an error to the caller as we try to avoid > adding code to libgit that dies. This lets the caller handle any cleanup > that they need to before exiting. Would the signature of get_fork_point change to be something like: int get_fork_point(const char *refname, struct commit *commit, struct commit **fork_point, struct strbuf *err) If not, could you point me to an example of some existing code that does what you're talking about? > On 06/12/2019 01:48, Denton Liu wrote: > > It's not obvious why this was failing in the first place. Perhaps we > > could document it better in the commit message? > > > > Maybe something like: > > > > We used to pass in the upstream_name directly into the > > get_fork_point() machinery. However, get_fork_point() was > > expecting a fully qualified ref name even though most users use > > the short name for branches. This resulted in `--fork-point` not > > working as expected since, without the full ref name, the reflog > > lookup would fail and it would behave as if we weren't passing > > in `--fork-point` at all. Sounds good. > > Also, I'm not why this test case in particular that was duplicated (and > > not the one above) given that the first three `--fork-point` test cases > > fail without the change to rebase. Perhaps we want to duplicate all > > "refs/heads/master" tests with a corresponding "master" test? I only duplicated one so that there would only be one test case that would fail if a regression around getting the fork point with a short ref name was introduced. I just happened to pick that one because it was closest to the rebase command I was running when I found the bug :) I can include some of the above reasoning in the commit message. Alternatively: * I could duplicate all of tests * I could change all of the tests to use the short ref name I'm leaning towards just leaving one test (maybe with a comment?) for the short ref name --fork-point so that there is more resolution around where a bug could be on test failure. Let me know what you think, Alex
Hi Alex, On Fri, Dec 06, 2019 at 08:46:29AM -0500, Alex Torok wrote: > Thank you for the feedback Denton & Phillip! > > On Fri, Dec 6, 2019 at 5:52 AM Phillip Wood <phillip.wood123@gmail.com> wrote: > > On 06/12/2019 01:48, Denton Liu wrote: > > > nit: * should be attached to the variable name. > > > > I think you also need to free it once you've called get_fork_point() as > > well. > > Yup. Got it. > > > On 06/12/2019 01:48, Denton Liu wrote: > > > > > >> + dwim_ref_or_die(options.upstream_name, strlen(options.upstream_name), &full_name); > > > > > > Also, thinking about this more, would it be possible to put the dwim_ref > > > logic into get_fork_point() directly? There are currently only these two > > > callers so I suspect it should be fine and it'll result in cleaner > > > logic. > > > > If you do that then it would be better to use error() rather than die() > > in get_fork_point() and return an error to the caller as we try to avoid > > adding code to libgit that dies. This lets the caller handle any cleanup > > that they need to before exiting. > > Would the signature of get_fork_point change to be something like: > int get_fork_point(const char *refname, struct commit *commit, > struct commit **fork_point, struct strbuf *err) I would drop the last parameter. If an error is detected, you could just do return error(_("oh no, something bad happened")); Even though we try and avoid dying in the middle of libgit, we print errors out very often so it should be fine here. > > > Also, I'm not why this test case in particular that was duplicated (and > > > not the one above) given that the first three `--fork-point` test cases > > > fail without the change to rebase. Perhaps we want to duplicate all > > > "refs/heads/master" tests with a corresponding "master" test? > > I only duplicated one so that there would only be one test case that > would fail if a regression around getting the fork point with a short > ref name was introduced. > > I just happened to pick that one because it was closest to the rebase > command I was running when I found the bug :) > > I can include some of the above reasoning in the commit message. > Alternatively: > * I could duplicate all of tests > * I could change all of the tests to use the short ref name > > I'm leaning towards just leaving one test (maybe with a comment?) > for the short ref name --fork-point so that there is more resolution > around where a bug could be on test failure. I would just duplicate all of the tests. When the tests are pretty cheap to run (as they are in this case), I tend to err on the side of adding more tests since they might catch more odd edge-cases but, in this case, all of the fork point logic goes through one common block so the duplicate logic doesn't really buy us anything. I'm pretty impartial so I'll leave it up to you ;) Thanks, Denton > > Let me know what you think, > Alex
On 06/12/2019 19:11, Denton Liu wrote: > Hi Alex, > > On Fri, Dec 06, 2019 at 08:46:29AM -0500, Alex Torok wrote: >> Thank you for the feedback Denton & Phillip! >> >> On Fri, Dec 6, 2019 at 5:52 AM Phillip Wood <phillip.wood123@gmail.com> wrote: >>> On 06/12/2019 01:48, Denton Liu wrote: >>>> nit: * should be attached to the variable name. >>> >>> I think you also need to free it once you've called get_fork_point() as >>> well. >> >> Yup. Got it. >> >>> On 06/12/2019 01:48, Denton Liu wrote: >>>> >>>>> + dwim_ref_or_die(options.upstream_name, strlen(options.upstream_name), &full_name); >>>> >>>> Also, thinking about this more, would it be possible to put the dwim_ref >>>> logic into get_fork_point() directly? There are currently only these two >>>> callers so I suspect it should be fine and it'll result in cleaner >>>> logic. >>> >>> If you do that then it would be better to use error() rather than die() >>> in get_fork_point() and return an error to the caller as we try to avoid >>> adding code to libgit that dies. This lets the caller handle any cleanup >>> that they need to before exiting. >> >> Would the signature of get_fork_point change to be something like: >> int get_fork_point(const char *refname, struct commit *commit, >> struct commit **fork_point, struct strbuf *err) > > I would drop the last parameter. If an error is detected, you could just > do > > return error(_("oh no, something bad happened")); > > Even though we try and avoid dying in the middle of libgit, we print > errors out very often so it should be fine here. Yes that was what I was thinking of Best Wishes Phillip > >>>> Also, I'm not why this test case in particular that was duplicated (and >>>> not the one above) given that the first three `--fork-point` test cases >>>> fail without the change to rebase. Perhaps we want to duplicate all >>>> "refs/heads/master" tests with a corresponding "master" test? >> >> I only duplicated one so that there would only be one test case that >> would fail if a regression around getting the fork point with a short >> ref name was introduced. >> >> I just happened to pick that one because it was closest to the rebase >> command I was running when I found the bug :) >> >> I can include some of the above reasoning in the commit message. >> Alternatively: >> * I could duplicate all of tests >> * I could change all of the tests to use the short ref name >> >> I'm leaning towards just leaving one test (maybe with a comment?) >> for the short ref name --fork-point so that there is more resolution >> around where a bug could be on test failure. > > I would just duplicate all of the tests. When the tests are pretty cheap > to run (as they are in this case), I tend to err on the side of adding > more tests since they might catch more odd edge-cases but, in this case, > all of the fork point logic goes through one common block so the > duplicate logic doesn't really buy us anything. > > I'm pretty impartial so I'll leave it up to you ;) > > Thanks, > > Denton > >> >> Let me know what you think, >> Alex
diff --git a/builtin/rebase.c b/builtin/rebase.c index e755087b0f..821994f676 100644 --- a/builtin/rebase.c +++ b/builtin/rebase.c @@ -1980,8 +1980,10 @@ int cmd_rebase(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix) struct commit *head = lookup_commit_reference(the_repository, &options.orig_head); + char * full_name; + dwim_ref_or_die(options.upstream_name, strlen(options.upstream_name), &full_name); options.restrict_revision = - get_fork_point(options.upstream_name, head); + get_fork_point(full_name, head); } if (repo_read_index(the_repository) < 0) diff --git a/t/t3431-rebase-fork-point.sh b/t/t3431-rebase-fork-point.sh index 78851b9a2a..6ecdae918e 100755 --- a/t/t3431-rebase-fork-point.sh +++ b/t/t3431-rebase-fork-point.sh @@ -49,6 +49,7 @@ test_rebase 'G F C D B A' --no-fork-point --onto D test_rebase 'G F C B A' --no-fork-point --keep-base test_rebase 'G F E D B A' --fork-point refs/heads/master test_rebase 'G F D B A' --fork-point --onto D refs/heads/master +test_rebase 'G F D B A' --fork-point --onto D master test_rebase 'G F B A' --fork-point --keep-base refs/heads/master test_rebase 'G F C E D B A' refs/heads/master test_rebase 'G F C D B A' --onto D refs/heads/master
rebase --fork-point needs to look up the full ref name before calling get_fork_point in the same manner that merge-base --fork-point does. Signed-off-by: Alex Torok <alext9@gmail.com> --- builtin/rebase.c | 4 +++- t/t3431-rebase-fork-point.sh | 1 + 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)