From: Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com>
To: peff@peff.net
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/23] parse_commit_buffer(): treat lookup_tree() failure as parse error
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2019 16:12:20 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191024231220.96547-1-jonathantanmy@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191018044328.GB17879@sigill.intra.peff.net>
> And
> certainly we _have_ seen real-world cases, such as the one fixed by
> 806278dead (commit-graph.c: handle corrupt/missing trees, 2019-09-05).
>
> Note that we can't quite drop the check in the caller added by that
> commit yet, as there's some subtlety with repeated parsings (which will
> be addressed in a future commit).
I tried figuring out what the subtlety is by undoing the check you
describe, and did get a segfault in one of the tests, but couldn't
figure out exactly what is going on. Looking at the code, is it because
load_tree_for_commit() in commit-graph.c uses the return value of
lookup_tree() indiscriminately (which is the issue that this patch
fixes)?
This patch itself and patch 1 looks good (with the reasoning in the
commit message), of course.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-10-24 23:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 39+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-10-18 4:41 [PATCH 0/23] parsing and fsck cleanups Jeff King
2019-10-18 4:42 ` [PATCH 01/23] parse_commit_buffer(): treat lookup_commit() failure as parse error Jeff King
2019-10-24 3:37 ` Junio C Hamano
2019-10-24 18:01 ` Jeff King
2019-10-18 4:43 ` [PATCH 02/23] parse_commit_buffer(): treat lookup_tree() " Jeff King
2019-10-24 23:12 ` Jonathan Tan [this message]
2019-10-24 23:22 ` Jeff King
2019-10-18 4:45 ` [PATCH 03/23] parse_tag_buffer(): treat NULL tag pointer " Jeff King
2019-10-18 4:47 ` [PATCH 04/23] remember commit/tag parse failures Jeff King
2019-10-24 3:51 ` Junio C Hamano
2019-10-24 23:25 ` Jonathan Tan
2019-10-24 23:41 ` Jeff King
2019-10-18 4:48 ` [PATCH 05/23] fsck: stop checking commit->tree value Jeff King
2019-10-24 3:57 ` Junio C Hamano
2019-10-18 4:49 ` [PATCH 06/23] fsck: stop checking commit->parent counts Jeff King
2019-10-18 4:51 ` [PATCH 07/23] fsck: stop checking tag->tagged Jeff King
2019-10-18 4:54 ` [PATCH 08/23] fsck: require an actual buffer for non-blobs Jeff King
2019-10-18 4:56 ` [PATCH 09/23] fsck: unify object-name code Jeff King
2019-10-24 6:05 ` Junio C Hamano
2019-10-24 18:07 ` Jeff King
2019-10-25 3:23 ` Junio C Hamano
2019-10-25 21:20 ` Jeff King
2019-10-18 4:56 ` [PATCH 10/23] fsck_describe_object(): build on our get_object_name() primitive Jeff King
2019-10-24 6:06 ` Junio C Hamano
2019-10-18 4:57 ` [PATCH 11/23] fsck: use oids rather than objects for object_name API Jeff King
2019-10-18 4:58 ` [PATCH 12/23] fsck: don't require object structs for display functions Jeff King
2019-10-18 4:58 ` [PATCH 13/23] fsck: only provide oid/type in fsck_error callback Jeff King
2019-10-18 4:58 ` [PATCH 14/23] fsck: only require an oid for skiplist functions Jeff King
2019-10-18 4:59 ` [PATCH 15/23] fsck: don't require an object struct for report() Jeff King
2019-10-18 4:59 ` [PATCH 16/23] fsck: accept an oid instead of a "struct blob" for fsck_blob() Jeff King
2019-10-18 4:59 ` [PATCH 17/23] fsck: drop blob struct from fsck_finish() Jeff King
2019-10-18 5:00 ` [PATCH 18/23] fsck: don't require an object struct for fsck_ident() Jeff King
2019-10-18 5:00 ` [PATCH 19/23] fsck: don't require an object struct in verify_headers() Jeff King
2019-10-18 5:00 ` [PATCH 20/23] fsck: rename vague "oid" local variables Jeff King
2019-10-18 5:01 ` [PATCH 21/23] fsck: accept an oid instead of a "struct tag" for fsck_tag() Jeff King
2019-10-18 5:01 ` [PATCH 22/23] fsck: accept an oid instead of a "struct commit" for fsck_commit() Jeff King
2019-10-18 5:02 ` [PATCH 23/23] fsck: accept an oid instead of a "struct tree" for fsck_tree() Jeff King
2019-10-24 23:49 ` [PATCH 0/23] parsing and fsck cleanups Jonathan Tan
2019-10-25 3:11 ` Junio C Hamano
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20191024231220.96547-1-jonathantanmy@google.com \
--to=jonathantanmy@google.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=peff@peff.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://80x24.org/mirrors/git.git
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).