Re: [PATCH v3 07/12] unpack-trees: stop recursing into sparse directories
From: Elijah Newren <hidden>
Date: 2021-05-18 02:03:54
On Fri, May 14, 2021 at 11:31 AM Derrick Stolee via GitGitGadget [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
From: Derrick Stolee <redacted> When walking trees using traverse_trees_recursive() and unpack_callback(), we must not attempt to walk into a sparse directory entry. There are no index entries within that directory to compare to the tree object at that position, so skip over the entries of that tree. This code is used in many places, so the only way to test it is to start removing the command_requres_full_index option from one builtin at a time and carefully test that its use of unpack_trees() behaves correctly with a sparse-index. Such tests will be added by later changes. Signed-off-by: Derrick Stolee <redacted> --- diff-lib.c | 6 ++++++ unpack-trees.c | 7 +++++-- 2 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)diff --git a/diff-lib.c b/diff-lib.c index b73cc1859a49..d5e7e01132ee 100644 --- a/diff-lib.c +++ b/diff-lib.c@@ -322,6 +322,9 @@ static void show_new_file(struct rev_info *revs, unsigned int mode; unsigned dirty_submodule = 0; + if (S_ISSPARSEDIR(new_file->ce_mode)) + return; +
Makes sense, but is this related to the unpack-trees.c changes and the commit message, or should it be in a separate commit?
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
/* * New file in the index: it might actually be different in * the working tree.@@ -343,6 +346,9 @@ static int show_modified(struct rev_info *revs, const struct object_id *oid; unsigned dirty_submodule = 0; + if (S_ISSPARSEDIR(new_entry->ce_mode)) + return 0; +
Same question as above. And a few more questions... What if the old commit/tree had a file at this path, and the new commit/tree has a (sparse) directory at this path? Shouldn't _something_ be shown for the file deletion? Or does such a case not run through this code path? Also, wouldn't we expect it to be an error for show_modified() to be called on a sparse directory? If two sparse directories differed, we should have inflated the trees to find the differences in the path underneath them, right? And if they didn't differ, then show_modified() should not have been invoked? I can see cases where we wouldn't want to bother looking at the differences between to sparse directories, e.g. a --restrict-to-sparsity-paths option to diff/log/etc, but I don't see you setting this behind an option here.
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
if (get_stat_data(new_entry, &oid, &mode, cached, match_missing, &dirty_submodule, &revs->diffopt) < 0) { if (report_missing)diff --git a/unpack-trees.c b/unpack-trees.c index ef6a2b1c951c..703b0bdc9dfd 100644 --- a/unpack-trees.c +++ b/unpack-trees.c@@ -1261,6 +1261,7 @@ static int unpack_callback(int n, unsigned long mask, unsigned long dirmask, str struct cache_entry *src[MAX_UNPACK_TREES + 1] = { NULL, }; struct unpack_trees_options *o = info->data; const struct name_entry *p = names; + unsigned unpack_tree = 1; /* Find first entry with a real name (we could use "mask" too) */ while (!p->mode)@@ -1307,7 +1308,8 @@ static int unpack_callback(int n, unsigned long mask, unsigned long dirmask, str } } - if (unpack_nondirectories(n, mask, dirmask, src, names, info) < 0) + if (unpack_tree && + unpack_nondirectories(n, mask, dirmask, src, names, info) < 0) return -1; if (o->merge && src[0]) {@@ -1337,7 +1339,8 @@ static int unpack_callback(int n, unsigned long mask, unsigned long dirmask, str } } - if (traverse_trees_recursive(n, dirmask, mask & ~dirmask, + if (unpack_tree && + traverse_trees_recursive(n, dirmask, mask & ~dirmask, names, info) < 0) return -1; return mask; --gitgitgadget
The unpack-trees.c changes make sense to me still.