In commit 42c7f7ff9685 ("commit_packed_refs(): remove call to
`packed_refs_unlock()`", 2017-06-23), a call to packed_refs_unlock() was
added to files_initial_transaction_commit() in order to compensate for
removing that call from commit_packed_refs(). However, that call was
added in the cleanup section, which is run even if the packed_ref_store
was never locked (which happens if an error occurs earlier in the
function).
Create a new cleanup goto target which runs packed_refs_unlock(), and
ensure that only goto statements after a successful invocation of
packed_refs_lock() jump there.
Signed-off-by: Jonathan Tan <redacted>
---
I noticed this when one of our servers sent duplicate refs in its ref
advertisement (noticed through GIT_TRACE_PACKET). With this change (and
before the aforementioned commit 42c7f7ff9685), the error message is
"fatal: multiple updates for ref '<ref>' not allowed", which gives a
bigger clue to the problem. Currently, it is "fatal: BUG:
packed_refs_unlock() called when not locked".
(I couldn't replicate this problem in C Git.)
---
refs/files-backend.c | 5 +++--
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/refs/files-backend.c b/refs/files-backend.c
index f75d960e1..89bc5584a 100644
--- a/refs/files-backend.c
+++ b/refs/files-backend.c
@@ -2931,13 +2931,14 @@ static int files_initial_transaction_commit(struct ref_store *ref_store,
if (initial_ref_transaction_commit(packed_transaction, err)) {
ret = TRANSACTION_GENERIC_ERROR;
- goto cleanup;
+ goto locked_cleanup;
}
+locked_cleanup:
+ packed_refs_unlock(refs->packed_ref_store);
cleanup:
if (packed_transaction)
ref_transaction_free(packed_transaction);
- packed_refs_unlock(refs->packed_ref_store);
transaction->state = REF_TRANSACTION_CLOSED;
string_list_clear(&affected_refnames, 0);
return ret;--
2.16.0.rc1.238.g530d649a79-goog
On Tue, Feb 06, 2018 at 12:36:15PM -0800, Jonathan Tan wrote:
In commit 42c7f7ff9685 ("commit_packed_refs(): remove call to
`packed_refs_unlock()`", 2017-06-23), a call to packed_refs_unlock() was
added to files_initial_transaction_commit() in order to compensate for
removing that call from commit_packed_refs(). However, that call was
added in the cleanup section, which is run even if the packed_ref_store
was never locked (which happens if an error occurs earlier in the
function).
Create a new cleanup goto target which runs packed_refs_unlock(), and
ensure that only goto statements after a successful invocation of
packed_refs_lock() jump there.
The explanation and patch look good to me.
But this all seemed strangely familiar... I think this is the same bug
as:
https://public-inbox.org/git/20180118143841.1a4c674d@novascotia/
which is queued as mr/packed-ref-store-fix. It's listed as "will merge
to next" in the "what's cooking" from Jan 31st.
quoted hunk
diff --git a/refs/files-backend.c b/refs/files-backend.c
index f75d960e1..89bc5584a 100644
--- a/refs/files-backend.c
+++ b/refs/files-backend.c
@@ -2931,13 +2931,14 @@ static int files_initial_transaction_commit(struct ref_store *ref_store,
if (initial_ref_transaction_commit(packed_transaction, err)) {
ret = TRANSACTION_GENERIC_ERROR;
- goto cleanup;
+ goto locked_cleanup;
}
+locked_cleanup:
+ packed_refs_unlock(refs->packed_ref_store);
cleanup:
if (packed_transaction)
ref_transaction_free(packed_transaction);
- packed_refs_unlock(refs->packed_ref_store);
I actually like this double-label a bit more than what is queued on
mr/packed-ref-store-fix, though I am OK with either solution.
-Peff
On Wed, 7 Feb 2018 09:42:51 -0500
Jeff King [off-list ref] wrote:
But this all seemed strangely familiar... I think this is the same bug
as:
https://public-inbox.org/git/20180118143841.1a4c674d@novascotia/
which is queued as mr/packed-ref-store-fix. It's listed as "will merge
to next" in the "what's cooking" from Jan 31st.
Ah...thanks, I didn't notice that.
I actually like this double-label a bit more than what is queued on
mr/packed-ref-store-fix, though I am OK with either solution.
Same here.