Thread (2 messages) flat view 2 messages, 2 authors, 2016-06-15

Re: Be more careful about updating refs

From: Junio C Hamano <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-15 22:44:06

Junio C Hamano [off-list ref] writes:
The following patch seems to fix the issue for me, but this is
primarily meant for discussion, as I do not quite understand why
the same issue does not manifest itself when NO_MMAP is not
used.
...
BTW, the lookup of the object that dies is in update_branch().
The call to write_ref_sha1() at the last tries to verify b->sha1
is available and is a commit.

        static int update_branch(struct branch *b)
        {
                static const char *msg = "fast-import";
                struct ref_lock *lock;
                unsigned char old_sha1[20];

                if (read_ref(b->name, old_sha1))
                        hashclr(old_sha1);
                lock = lock_any_ref_for_update(b->name, old_sha1, 0);
                if (!lock)
                        return error("Unable to lock %s", b->name);
                if (!force_update && !is_null_sha1(old_sha1)) {
                        struct commit *old_cmit, *new_cmit;

                        old_cmit = lookup_commit_reference_gently(old_sha1, 0);
                        new_cmit = lookup_commit_reference_gently(b->sha1, 0);
                        if (!old_cmit || !new_cmit) {
                                unlock_ref(lock);
                                return error("Branch %s is missing commits.", b->name);
                        }

                        if (!in_merge_bases(old_cmit, &new_cmit, 1)) {
                                unlock_ref(lock);
                                warning("Not updating %s"
                                        " (new tip %s does not contain %s)",
                                        b->name, sha1_to_hex(b->sha1), sha1_to_hex(old_sha1));
                                return -1;
                        }
                }
                if (write_ref_sha1(lock, b->sha1, msg) < 0)
                        return error("Unable to update %s", b->name);
                return 0;
        }

The write_ref_sha1() function previously did not even check if
the object pointed at by b->sha1 actually existed, but now it
parses the object and makes sure it is a commit, if the updated
ref is under ref/heads/ hierarchy.

What I do not quite understand is how this can be a new issue.

The codepath to allow updating an existing branch shown above
(i.e. "if it is not force and old is not NULL") uses the usual
lookup_commit_reference_gently() interface to access b->sha1,
and does not use gfi-aware gfi_unpack_entry() or anything
magical, which means it would have passed the same codepath down
to trigger the same issue.  IOW, even before this tightening of
write_ref_sha1(), we already should have had the issue of not
being to able to grab the object b->sha1 refers to out of the
newly built packfile.

Is it just nobody seriously exercised the codepath yet, or is
there a difference between these two calls that is more subtle
than that?

Quite confused...
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help