From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS3215 2.6.0.0/16 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.6 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,PI_IMPORTANCE_HIGH,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE,URIBL_CSS,URIBL_CSS_A shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from out1.vger.email (out1.vger.email [IPv6:2620:137:e000::1:20]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id ADB7D1F4D7 for ; Thu, 12 May 2022 23:39:43 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: dcvr.yhbt.net; dkim=pass (1024-bit key; unprotected) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b="HDSCSdIA"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1359554AbiELXjX (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 May 2022 19:39:23 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:59072 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1359534AbiELXjQ (ORCPT ); Thu, 12 May 2022 19:39:16 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com (pb-smtp2.pobox.com [64.147.108.71]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C3B52286FF9 for ; Thu, 12 May 2022 16:39:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B2AF11CC07; Thu, 12 May 2022 19:39:14 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=sasl; bh=okDg8VhP5R2G d8mrFIgbs17g0XipEpVfctn7REPx0w8=; b=HDSCSdIATc1Mu5PUIAZ6Zco9qb6A V9oWuugGEwWtCtZzmQLSHKNj6dXt1JjQMu5qq4+V5lnAOdzwfNhxp94RIFw/qepF CZWpVE+xTKJbLKYIpxn5Q+qm4WLM1jveOq3151j0gBeTjXcFQNXkanQSpXMpIU0I bQ6TT6UYnYBCidw= Received: from pb-smtp2.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 628B511CC06; Thu, 12 May 2022 19:39:14 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [34.83.65.128]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B8AD411CC04; Thu, 12 May 2022 19:39:13 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: git@vger.kernel.org Cc: =?utf-8?B?w4Z2YXIgQXJuZmrDtnLDsA==?= Bjarmason Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/4] object-file: fix a unpack_loose_header() regression in 3b6a8db3b03 References: <20220512223218.237544-1-gitster@pobox.com> <20220512223218.237544-5-gitster@pobox.com> Importance: high Date: Thu, 12 May 2022 16:39:12 -0700 In-Reply-To: <20220512223218.237544-5-gitster@pobox.com> (Junio C. Hamano's message of "Thu, 12 May 2022 15:32:18 -0700") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 X-Pobox-Relay-ID: BAF73786-D24C-11EC-8920-CB998F0A682E-77302942!pb-smtp2.pobox.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Junio C Hamano writes: > diff --git a/object-file.c b/object-file.c > index 5ffbf3d4fd..b5d1d12b68 100644 > --- a/object-file.c > +++ b/object-file.c > @@ -2623,8 +2623,12 @@ int read_loose_object(const char *path, > goto out; > } > =20 > - if (unpack_loose_header(&stream, map, mapsize, hdr, sizeof(hdr), > - NULL) < 0) { > + switch (unpack_loose_header(&stream, map, mapsize, hdr, sizeof(hdr), > + NULL)) { > + case ULHR_OK: > + break; > + case ULHR_BAD: > + case ULHR_TOO_LONG: > error(_("unable to unpack header of %s"), path); > goto out; > } Regarding this hunk, since we only care about a single "did we get any error, or did we unpack OK" bit, I think this should be more like if (unpack_loose_header(...) !=3D ULHR_OK) { error(_("unable to..."), path); goto out; } It is true, as =C3=86var mentioned, that there is another place in the same file that uses switch() in loose_object_info(), and it should remain to be switch() on the returned enum because it wants to behave differnetly depending on the kind of error it gets. But that is not a reason to make this part that only cares about a single "did it fail?" into a switch and force future developers to add a useless case arm. I left it there as posted in the previous round because I was too lazy ;-) and also it is something we can clean up with a follow up patch outside the series. As my today's focus has been to reduce the number of topics waiting for a reroll, I'd rather leave things that are not outright broken but needs clean up as they are for the sake of expediency. Thanks.