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=-3.1 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM, RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=no 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 1235F201C2 for ; Sat, 11 Mar 2017 13:07:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755540AbdCKNHT (ORCPT ); Sat, 11 Mar 2017 08:07:19 -0500 Received: from mail-io0-f194.google.com ([209.85.223.194]:35446 "EHLO mail-io0-f194.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751817AbdCKNHR (ORCPT ); Sat, 11 Mar 2017 08:07:17 -0500 Received: by mail-io0-f194.google.com with SMTP id f103so9367062ioi.2 for ; Sat, 11 Mar 2017 05:07:16 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=Ow/KZSjdxOuE+spWc5LwB8uMsYr3xxT+tXW+eLYz4ck=; b=WpL+IGgP0dYDc7SrOGSIS+rS69zwyVjeJF3xtl70an1VEHhnA8EEkZ759gI8KkTxgM XoiUxaWs0e7mCnobZyuKoZW4IgMYAGAiBOyvfrhCnWtfz3Nw7GQP8aD7YShftTabi79f mpen3g3ofE79S3oXb3Atcci9lcZ4SC2/NndtBCo/cGJBcR6xvIgjeasjSb1zPt/nzvLU 8pP0HFEfQZd/VaQ1LiMKOjuP4xN5w2pN7CauDzbNONiwfmAGZiENevBsdmIz8t8WjVRW HFgibD44YxQeKuh7qiU/mL6I033NVoPMwwsyHyEd43JG4OUbxWLmm0Xekbf1ieFA1ssx I8gw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=Ow/KZSjdxOuE+spWc5LwB8uMsYr3xxT+tXW+eLYz4ck=; b=iNms8H5PskDcN4RYryIAd+zLsZwWatQQ6cOZfT/0BriVt7dFB5PiyxsD2NFzHnLSIG XjtyoZIOyMGom3JsTw6GovLiaXqHgJkvBoDXrWfOLiyjicdm9X1PKl187ojPiKdfElEy osREnpr1/f66nBbOnmILzlAzIzY6erB5OXYHAR5ERYnaOzi9qq4ahn7T+o6pM4j54Gmv g/BE3LMtyhoIPLv9xkhL//xCEE7ObB1NvOKJA4elPw3XXLq7JAxozS/s2eAAPTl/ilKq 1grVwv+tDnvuNsudV3duOUoY21/+4G+w30D99jwy/hIRc1+rHAPXg2wX3eKn9dn8afpU E/iw== X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39lqqnAexxus63DExiL0hYlsYI6z0amd80clJ4dZDjmDJuCKeZyy6shXoT7dhsFhwUjPCKt3AIb79EmJhg== X-Received: by 10.107.200.139 with SMTP id y133mr22482383iof.147.1489237636315; Sat, 11 Mar 2017 05:07:16 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.107.130.208 with HTTP; Sat, 11 Mar 2017 05:06:55 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20170309132728.c57ltzel746l366a@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <20170308202025.17900-1-avarab@gmail.com> <20170309100910.z4h7bwqzxw2xynyu@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20170309104657.7pwreyozxo2tdhk4@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20170309125132.tubwxtneffok4nrc@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20170309132728.c57ltzel746l366a@sigill.intra.peff.net> From: =?UTF-8?B?w4Z2YXIgQXJuZmrDtnLDsCBCamFybWFzb24=?= Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2017 14:06:55 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] fix object flag pollution in "tag --contains" To: Jeff King Cc: Git Mailing List , Junio C Hamano , Lars Hjemli , Christian Couder Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Mar 9, 2017 at 2:27 PM, Jeff King wrote: > On Thu, Mar 09, 2017 at 07:51:32AM -0500, Jeff King wrote: > >> Looking at this, I'm pretty sure that using "--contains" with "--merged" >> has similar problems, as they both use the UNINTERESTING bit. So even >> without your patch, there is a lurking bug. Sorry about the late reply. Been a while since I was active on the git ML, and my broken list search was searching for cc:me, not to:me. So I sent my v3 in <20170310203348.675-1-avarab@gmail.com> without reading this. > I wasn't able to come up with a simple case that actually demonstrates > the bug. But I feel like it has to be triggerable with the right > sequence of history. The tag brute force script I hacked up (https://gist.github.com/avar/45cf288ce7cdc43e7395c6cbf9a98d68) is now at >1k iterations without finding anything. But of course it may be broken / this may not be producible on git.git > Even without that, though, I feel like moving away from this flag usage > is a good cleanup. Here's a cleaned-up series. What do you think of > building your patch on top? > > We can do it the other way around if you prefer. Getting this in master first sounds good. I already have a working v4 on top of this, which is of course much faster for the --contains combined with --no-contains case. Gotta run now, but will clean up that patch & submit it to the list soon. > [1/4]: ref-filter: move ref_cbdata definition into ref-filter.c > [2/4]: ref-filter: use contains_result enum consistently > [3/4]: ref-filter: die on parse_commit errors > [4/4]: ref-filter: use separate cache for contains_tag_algo > > ref-filter.c | 70 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++---------------------- > ref-filter.h | 5 ----- > 2 files changed, 44 insertions(+), 31 deletions(-) > > -Peff