From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
To: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Cc: Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com>,
git@vger.kernel.org, jrnieder@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] sha1-file: remove OBJECT_INFO_SKIP_CACHED
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2020 16:14:49 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200106211449.GA980197@coredump.intra.peff.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <xmqqftgxedtk.fsf@gitster-ct.c.googlers.com>
On Thu, Jan 02, 2020 at 01:41:27PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com> writes:
>
> > As a historical note, the function now known as repo_read_object_file()
> > was taught the empty tree in 346245a1bb ("hard-code the empty tree
> > object", 2008-02-13), and the function now known as oid_object_info()
> > was taught the empty tree in c4d9986f5f ("sha1_object_info: examine
> > cached_object store too", 2011-02-07). repo_has_object_file() was never
> > updated, perhaps due to oversight. The flag OBJECT_INFO_SKIP_CACHED,
> > introduced later in dfdd4afcf9 ("sha1_file: teach
> > sha1_object_info_extended more flags", 2017-06-26) and used in
> > e83e71c5e1 ("sha1_file: refactor has_sha1_file_with_flags", 2017-06-26),
> > was introduced to preserve this difference in empty-tree handling, but
> > now it can be removed.
>
> I am not 100% sure if the implication of this change is safe to
> allow us to say "now it can be".
>
> The has_object_file() helper wanted to say "no" when given a
> non-existing object registered via the pretend_object_file(),
> presumably because we wanted to allow a use pattern like:
>
> - prepare an in-core representation of an object we tentatively
> expect, but not absolutely sure, to be necessary.
>
> - perform operations, using the object data obtained via
> read_object() API, which is capable of yielding data even for
> such "pretend" objects (perhaps we are creating a tentative merge
> parents during a recursive merge).
>
> - write out final set of objects by enumerating those that do not
> really exist yet (via has_object_file() API).
>
> Teaching about the empty tree to has_object_file() is a good thing
> (especially because we do not necessarily write an empty tree object
> to our repositories), but as a collateral damage of doing so, we
> make such use pattern impossible.
>
> It is not a large loss---the third bullet in the above list can just
> be made to unconditionally call write_object_file() without
> filtering with has_object_file() and write_object_file() will apply
> the right optimization anyway, so it probably is OK.
I agree that whoever called pretend_object_file() can be careful and
write out the final set of objects itself via write_object_file(). But
I'd worry a bit about a caller who doesn't necessarily realize that they
need to do that. E.g., imagine we call pretend_object_file() for some
blob oid, expecting it to be read-only. And then in the same process,
some other bit of the code writes out a tree that mentions that blob.
Oops, that tree is now corrupt after we exit the process. And IMHO
neither the pretend-caller nor the tree-writer are to blame; the problem
is that they shared global state they were not expecting.
This is pretty far-fetched given that the only user of
pretend_object_file() is in git-blame right now. But it does give me
pause. Overall, though, I'm more inclined to say that we should be
dropping SKIP_CACHED here and considering pretend_object_file() to be a
bit dangerous (i.e., to keep it in mind if somebody proposes more
calls).
Another point of reference (in favor of Jonathan's patch):
https://lore.kernel.org/git/20190304174053.GA27497@sigill.intra.peff.net/
is a bug that would not have happened if this patch had been applied
(there's also some discussion of the greater issue, but nothing that wasn't
already brought up here, I think).
-Peff
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-01-06 21:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-12-30 21:10 [PATCH] sha1-file: remove OBJECT_INFO_SKIP_CACHED Jonathan Tan
2019-12-30 21:43 ` Junio C Hamano
2019-12-30 22:01 ` Jonathan Nieder
2019-12-31 0:39 ` Jonathan Tan
2019-12-31 1:03 ` Jonathan Nieder
2020-01-02 20:15 ` Jonathan Tan
2020-01-02 20:16 ` [PATCH v2] " Jonathan Tan
2020-01-02 21:41 ` Junio C Hamano
2020-01-06 21:14 ` Jeff King [this message]
2020-01-04 0:13 ` Jonathan Nieder
2020-01-06 21:17 ` Jeff King
2020-01-06 23:47 ` Jonathan Nieder
2020-01-07 11:22 ` Jeff King
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=20200106211449.GA980197@coredump.intra.peff.net \
--to=peff@peff.net \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=jonathantanmy@google.com \
--cc=jrnieder@gmail.com \
/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).