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=-3.9 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE 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 254E11F4D7 for ; Fri, 6 May 2022 16:31:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1388598AbiEFQea (ORCPT ); Fri, 6 May 2022 12:34:30 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:39194 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1443889AbiEFQeY (ORCPT ); Fri, 6 May 2022 12:34:24 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp20.pobox.com (pb-smtp20.pobox.com [173.228.157.52]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A6C80D46 for ; Fri, 6 May 2022 09:30:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pb-smtp20.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B666417D5F0; Fri, 6 May 2022 12:30:38 -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; s=sasl; bh=b0A1n5tG9/QQpIAhwuu3cp/DJZ+FnKtvKTWlxh gz+ZA=; b=ryJD+Vt0xi9vTPpDbjAIlJP5ald1gdNm2L0V9iVjCyhQgaqDXt0C8R adzugYqsp+Gg3OwhG9vlYGYpPvuf78QuSxN/9wrQDfsnuKDbp0+YFP31HugAo5nc b/1yQMJTxZu8XtVH41bA8E3y/coCx6YGlxB8DHgx9CuylxSMkJ15c= Received: from pb-smtp20.sea.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AF95717D5ED; Fri, 6 May 2022 12:30:38 -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-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5956217D5E8; Fri, 6 May 2022 12:30:35 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Alex Riesen Cc: Taylor Blau , , Elijah Newren , =?utf-8?B?Tmd1eeG7hW4gVGjDoWkgTmfhu41j?= Duy Subject: Re: Crashes in t/t4058-diff-duplicates.sh References: Date: Fri, 06 May 2022 09:30:34 -0700 In-Reply-To: (Alex Riesen's message of "Fri, 6 May 2022 12:18:28 +0200") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: DB217C58-CD59-11EC-ACBD-C85A9F429DF0-77302942!pb-smtp20.pobox.com Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Alex Riesen writes: > Taylor Blau, Fri, May 06, 2022 05:31:12 +0200: >> t4058.16, which blames back to ac14de13b2 (t4058: explore duplicate tree That commit talks about "trees with duplicate entries". Does it mean a bad history where a tree object has two or more entries under the same name? We should of course be catching these things at fsck time and rejecting at network transfer time, but I agree it is not a good excuse for us to segfault. We should diagnose it as a broken tree object and actively refuse to proceed by calling die().