Re: [PATCH v6 14/42] sequencer.c: use ref transactions for all ref updates
From: Jonathan Nieder <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-15 23:01:10
Ronnie Sahlberg wrote:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
--- a/sequencer.c +++ b/sequencer.c@@ -272,23 +272,31 @@ static int error_dirty_index(struct replay_opts *opts) static int fast_forward_to(const unsigned char *to, const unsigned char *from, int unborn, struct replay_opts *opts) { - struct ref_lock *ref_lock; + struct ref_transaction *transaction; struct strbuf sb = STRBUF_INIT; - int ret; + struct strbuf err = STRBUF_INIT; read_cache(); if (checkout_fast_forward(from, to, 1)) exit(1); /* the callee should have complained already */ - ref_lock = lock_any_ref_for_update("HEAD", unborn ? null_sha1 : from, - 0, NULL); - if (!ref_lock) - return error(_("Failed to lock HEAD during fast_forward_to")); strbuf_addf(&sb, "%s: fast-forward", action_name(opts)); - ret = write_ref_sha1(ref_lock, to, sb.buf); + + transaction = ref_transaction_begin(); + if ((!transaction || + ref_transaction_update(transaction, "HEAD", to, from, + 0, !unborn)) ||
These parentheses make it harder to parse. Other patches in this
series do
if (!transaction ||
ref_transaction_update(...) ||
ref_transaction_commit(...)) {
so this could do
if (!transaction ||
ref_transaction_update(...) ||
(ref_transaction_commit(...) && !(transaction = NULL))) {
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
+ (ref_transaction_commit(transaction, sb.buf, &err) && + !(transaction = NULL))) { + ref_transaction_rollback(transaction);
Earlier patches in the series didn't bother rolling back. Should they have? Thanks, Jonathan