From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.1 (2015-04-28) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.9 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.1 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 72B6E1F6AC for ; Tue, 3 Jul 2018 14:34:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753129AbeGCOeT (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Jul 2018 10:34:19 -0400 Received: from cloud.peff.net ([104.130.231.41]:57726 "HELO cloud.peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1752745AbeGCOeS (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Jul 2018 10:34:18 -0400 Received: (qmail 20786 invoked by uid 109); 3 Jul 2018 14:34:18 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO peff.net) (10.0.1.2) by cloud.peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with SMTP; Tue, 03 Jul 2018 14:34:18 +0000 Authentication-Results: cloud.peff.net; auth=none Received: (qmail 2205 invoked by uid 111); 3 Jul 2018 14:34:18 -0000 Received: from sigill.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.7) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with (ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 encrypted) SMTP; Tue, 03 Jul 2018 10:34:18 -0400 Authentication-Results: peff.net; auth=none Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Tue, 03 Jul 2018 10:34:16 -0400 Date: Tue, 3 Jul 2018 10:34:16 -0400 From: Jeff King To: Ramsay Jones Cc: Junio C Hamano , Jason@zx2c4.com, GIT Mailing-list Subject: Re: [PATCH] fsck: check skiplist for object in fsck_blob() Message-ID: <20180703143416.GA23556@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <2fc2d53f-e193-2a2a-9f8f-b3e1d256d940@ramsayjones.plus.com> <20180628114912.GA12901@sigill.intra.peff.net> <0a18acbd-0124-1c92-0046-05b8b035dd28@ramsayjones.plus.com> <20180628174501.GC31766@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20180628220332.GA5128@sigill.intra.peff.net> <9162ed69-d245-8b2f-0dcc-3b345264b029@ramsayjones.plus.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <9162ed69-d245-8b2f-0dcc-3b345264b029@ramsayjones.plus.com> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Jun 29, 2018 at 02:10:59AM +0100, Ramsay Jones wrote: > On 28/06/18 23:03, Jeff King wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 07:53:27PM +0100, Ramsay Jones wrote: > [snip] > > Yes, it can go in quickly. But I'd prefer not to keep it in the long > > term if it's literally doing nothing. > > Hmm, I don't think you can say its doing nothing! > > "Yeah, this solution seems sensible. Given that we would > never report any error for that blob, there is no point > in even looking at it." > > ... is no less true, with or without additional patches! ;-) True that we don't even bother doing the parsing with your patch. But I think I talked myself out of that part being a significant savings elsewhere. I guess it would be OK to leave it in. It just feels like it would be vestigial after the rest of the patches. > > I have some patches which I think solve your problem. They apply on > > v2.18.0, but not on v2.17.1 (because they rely on Dscho's increased > > passing of config_options in v2.18). Is that good enough? > > Heh, I was also writing patches to address this tonight (but > I was also watching the football, so I was somewhat behind you). > My patches were not too dissimilar to yours, except I was aiming > to allow even do_config_from_file() etc., to suppress errors. I think this should work via do_config_from_file(). The thing it really misses is that git_config_with_options() will not respect it, but the handling of options there is already a bug (well, I don't think there's anything triggerable either before or after my patches, but it feels like a bug waiting to happen). > Your patches were cleaner and more focused than mine. (Instead of > turning die_on_error into an enum, I added an additional 'quiet' > flag. When pushing the stack (eg. for include files), I had to > copy the quiet flag from the parent struct, etc, ... ;-) ). Yes, I think that's what you have to do pre-v2.18, where we don't pass the options struct around. > > Yes, it would include any syntax error. I also have a slight worry about > > that, but nobody seems to have screamed _yet_. :) > > Hmm, I don't think we can ignore this. :( I'm not sure. This has been running on every push to GitHub for the past 6 weeks, and this is the first report. It's hard to say what that means, and technically speaking of course this _is_ a regression. There's a nearby thread of interest, too, which I cc'd you on: https://public-inbox.org/git/20180703070650.b3drk5a6kb4k4tnp@glandium.org/ > > Here are the patches I came up with. > > Yes, I applied these locally and tested them. All OK here. > > So, FWIW, Ack! > > [I still think my original patch, with the 'to_be_skipped' > function name changed to 'object_on_skiplist', should be > the first patch of the series!] Thanks. If we're going to do any loosening, I think we may want to address that _first_, so it can go directly on top of the patches in v2.17.1 (because it's a bigger issue than the stray message, IMHO). -Peff