From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.2 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI, RP_MATCHES_RCVD,URI_HEX shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 23B72205C9 for ; Thu, 5 Jan 2017 19:33:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1763680AbdAETbE (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 Jan 2017 14:31:04 -0500 Received: from mail-pf0-f181.google.com ([209.85.192.181]:36104 "EHLO mail-pf0-f181.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1763464AbdAET3N (ORCPT ); Thu, 5 Jan 2017 14:29:13 -0500 Received: by mail-pf0-f181.google.com with SMTP id 189so89087795pfz.3 for ; Thu, 05 Jan 2017 11:29:13 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=gLgoiNZ6wi8kFQbLsyMcTkJK98phUrO4iVBOJjHE1uc=; b=XL99+GGzztxzEcPua80FF1fW2AwZ0I6OHpc61QbfUD/QjJn2Mpqd4wz0u36p6114p7 2KMmS2InXmVGhKZZDOaTL4pXBy4aNHsGV9gxUldy5oaQnU34TnTGw08Ysm8DSqENPw60 YXiPun/cBRkUhu3tpGSjOwHQJIhN55oZRYnek7FPQv7WlQyf6tXZ0jFRuSdCr59Zxp+Q J8jNqOuUcP619IMUSo9pURy1j7Hk1zWrRbH2Cobj+QsMXUlwn4fZU8sK9vm6kIAyH+kk DeE2o5rMxYNPWx12vW0zKzuUwX9+qQRoiWU6PMePowHjYcIwGUMojdZn/I107ksdXhSm OX5Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to :references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=gLgoiNZ6wi8kFQbLsyMcTkJK98phUrO4iVBOJjHE1uc=; b=KOxKLfytJceSlq7tElK5C6CNY8fiUYr7ZWsloyqFlxgGF9XZVzhZnuL/6b86IBqdTs PJhYekSp/s9SBgdWkfhlw0kCztgwIhp5g1fXzgwYLgeKKGnsyOYWKRnTg30dA+TVBfIA S7tRI/X8T1dbCd2v6ACV5c4/HORUwJ4k4Bp3CWWVDMfE8jO8beko13AAZhFd+05KmlzJ TrWoc41Nbk8eSyJaG8vrZTgeitH+3voPYqvSGy5kuu3b4RzmnTbpwH8oOU/yXUty3LE+ WFABvSt/U1DyRW1hmur9VAyw7IkVwzroiQwlS85ykK8wbA5J+mL/8ZF0pAIN/JmTOadK FYog== X-Gm-Message-State: AIkVDXIheOhm531Yz9OMBlE/KbdRNNDZimLCHH4hwlKZNRzkS4b2mSinF3oCHkO0mGd6I3gc X-Received: by 10.99.125.65 with SMTP id m1mr136831139pgn.159.1483644552621; Thu, 05 Jan 2017 11:29:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost ([2620:0:1000:5b10:d8d4:45f:826c:3a9f]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id g85sm114776305pfe.38.2017.01.05.11.29.12 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Thu, 05 Jan 2017 11:29:12 -0800 (PST) From: Stefan Beller To: bmwill@google.com, peff@peff.net, gitster@pobox.com Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Stefan Beller Subject: [PATCHv6 2/2] pathspec: give better message for submodule related pathspec error Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2017 11:29:04 -0800 Message-Id: <20170105192904.1107-3-sbeller@google.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.11.0.31.g919a8d0.dirty In-Reply-To: <20170105192904.1107-1-sbeller@google.com> References: <20170105192904.1107-1-sbeller@google.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Every once in a while someone complains to the mailing list to have run into this weird assertion[1]. The usual response from the mailing list is link to old discussions[2], and acknowledging the problem stating it is known. This patch accomplishes two things: 1. Switch assert() to die("BUG") to give a more readable message. 2. Take one of the cases where we hit a BUG and turn it into a normal "there was something wrong with the input" message.   This assertion triggered for cases where there wasn't a programming   bug, but just bogus input. In particular, if the user asks for a   pathspec that is inside a submodule, we shouldn't assert() or   die("BUG"); we should tell the user their request is bogus. The only reason we did not check for it, is the expensive nature of such a check, so callers avoid setting the flag PATHSPEC_STRIP_SUBMODULE_SLASH_EXPENSIVE. However when we die due to bogus input, the expense of CPU cycles spent outweighs the user wondering what went wrong, so run that check unconditionally before dying with a more generic error message. Note: There is a case (e.g. "git -C submodule add .") in which we call strip_submodule_slash_expensive, as git-add requests it via the flag PATHSPEC_STRIP_SUBMODULE_SLASH_EXPENSIVE, but the assert used to trigger nevertheless, because the flag PATHSPEC_LITERAL was not set, such that we executed if (item->nowildcard_len < prefixlen) item->nowildcard_len = prefixlen; and prefixlen was not adapted (e.g. it was computed from "submodule/") So in the die_inside_submodule_path function we also need handle paths, that were stripped before, i.e. are the exact submodule path. This is why the conditions in die_inside_submodule_path are slightly different than in strip_submodule_slash_expensive. [1] https://www.google.com/search?q=item-%3Enowildcard_len [2] http://git.661346.n2.nabble.com/assert-failed-in-submodule-edge-case-td7628687.html https://www.spinics.net/lists/git/msg249473.html Helped-by: Jeff King Helped-by: Junio C Hamano Signed-off-by: Stefan Beller --- pathspec.c | 35 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-- t/t6134-pathspec-in-submodule.sh | 33 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 2 files changed, 66 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) create mode 100755 t/t6134-pathspec-in-submodule.sh diff --git a/pathspec.c b/pathspec.c index d4efcf6662..42cd83c235 100644 --- a/pathspec.c +++ b/pathspec.c @@ -296,6 +296,27 @@ static void strip_submodule_slash_expensive(struct pathspec_item *item) } } +static void die_inside_submodule_path(struct pathspec_item *item) +{ + int i; + + for (i = 0; i < active_nr; i++) { + struct cache_entry *ce = active_cache[i]; + int ce_len = ce_namelen(ce); + + if (!S_ISGITLINK(ce->ce_mode)) + continue; + + if (item->len < ce_len || + !(item->match[ce_len] == '/' || item->match[ce_len] == '\0') || + memcmp(ce->name, item->match, ce_len)) + continue; + + die(_("Pathspec '%s' is in submodule '%.*s'"), + item->original, ce_len, ce->name); + } +} + /* * Perform the initialization of a pathspec_item based on a pathspec element. */ @@ -391,8 +412,18 @@ static void init_pathspec_item(struct pathspec_item *item, unsigned flags, } /* sanity checks, pathspec matchers assume these are sane */ - assert(item->nowildcard_len <= item->len && - item->prefix <= item->len); + if (item->nowildcard_len > item->len || + item->prefix > item->len) { + /* + * This case can be triggered by the user pointing us to a + * pathspec inside a submodule, which is an input error. + * Detect that here and complain, but fallback in the + * non-submodule case to a BUG, as we have no idea what + * would trigger that. + */ + die_inside_submodule_path(item); + die ("BUG: item->nowildcard_len > item->len || item->prefix > item->len)"); + } } static int pathspec_item_cmp(const void *a_, const void *b_) diff --git a/t/t6134-pathspec-in-submodule.sh b/t/t6134-pathspec-in-submodule.sh new file mode 100755 index 0000000000..2900d8d06e --- /dev/null +++ b/t/t6134-pathspec-in-submodule.sh @@ -0,0 +1,33 @@ +#!/bin/sh + +test_description='test case exclude pathspec' + +TEST_CREATE_SUBMODULE=yes +. ./test-lib.sh + +test_expect_success 'setup a submodule' ' + git submodule add ./pretzel.bare sub && + git commit -a -m "add submodule" && + git submodule deinit --all +' + +cat <expect +fatal: Pathspec 'sub/a' is in submodule 'sub' +EOF + +test_expect_success 'error message for path inside submodule' ' + echo a >sub/a && + test_must_fail git add sub/a 2>actual && + test_cmp expect actual +' + +cat <expect +fatal: Pathspec '.' is in submodule 'sub' +EOF + +test_expect_success 'error message for path inside submodule from within submodule' ' + test_must_fail git -C sub add . 2>actual && + test_cmp expect actual +' + +test_done -- 2.11.0.31.g919a8d0.dirty