Re: [PATCH v3 1/6] hook: run a list of hooks instead
From: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <hidden>
Date: 2021-08-27 11:20:15
Subsystem:
the rest · Maintainer:
Linus Torvalds
On Thu, Aug 26 2021, Emily Shaffer wrote:
On Tue, Aug 24, 2021 at 04:56:10PM +0200, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:quoted
On Wed, Aug 18 2021, Emily Shaffer wrote:quoted
@@ -25,7 +25,8 @@ static int run(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix) struct run_hooks_opt opt = RUN_HOOKS_OPT_INIT; int ignore_missing = 0; const char *hook_name; - const char *hook_path; + struct list_head *hooks; + struct option run_options[] = { OPT_BOOL(0, "ignore-missing", &ignore_missing, N_("exit quietly with a zero exit code if the requested hook cannot be found")),In general in this patch series there's a bunch of little whitespace changes like that along with other changes. I think it's probably best if I just absorb that in the "base" topic instead of doing them here. E.g. in this case we could also add a line between "struct option" and the rest. I don't mind either way, but the whitespace churn makes for distracting reading...Ah, hm. I don't know if in this specific case it's necessary for me to even have this whitespace change, since 'run_options' is still a struct declaration. I'll just drop this one, but in general whichever whitespace bits you like from this topic, feel free to absorb. Will make a note to scan through the diff when I rebase onto your next reroll checking for spurious whitespace changes.quoted
quoted
@@ -58,15 +59,16 @@ static int run(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix) git_config(git_default_config, NULL); hook_name = argv[0]; - if (ignore_missing) - return run_hooks_oneshot(hook_name, &opt); - hook_path = find_hook(hook_name); - if (!hook_path) { + hooks = list_hooks(hook_name); + if (list_empty(hooks)) { + /* ... act like run_hooks_oneshot() under --ignore-missing */ + if (ignore_missing) + return 0; error("cannot find a hook named %s", hook_name); return 1; } - ret = run_hooks(hook_name, hook_path, &opt); + ret = run_hooks(hook_name, hooks, &opt); run_hooks_opt_clear(&opt); return ret;This memory management is a bit inconsistent. So here we list_hooks(), pass it to run_hooks(), which clears it for us, OK...quoted
-int run_hooks(const char *hook_name, const char *hook_path, - struct run_hooks_opt *options) +int run_hooks(const char *hook_name, struct list_head *hooks, + struct run_hooks_opt *options) { - struct strbuf abs_path = STRBUF_INIT; - struct hook my_hook = { - .hook_path = hook_path, - }; struct hook_cb_data cb_data = { .rc = 0, .hook_name = hook_name,@@ -197,11 +241,9 @@ int run_hooks(const char *hook_name, const char *hook_path, if (!options) BUG("a struct run_hooks_opt must be provided to run_hooks"); - if (options->absolute_path) { - strbuf_add_absolute_path(&abs_path, hook_path); - my_hook.hook_path = abs_path.buf; - } - cb_data.run_me = &my_hook; + + cb_data.head = hooks; + cb_data.run_me = list_first_entry(hooks, struct hook, list); run_processes_parallel_tr2(jobs, pick_next_hook,@@ -213,18 +255,15 @@ int run_hooks(const char *hook_name, const char *hook_path, "hook", hook_name); - - if (options->absolute_path) - strbuf_release(&abs_path); - free(my_hook.feed_pipe_cb_data); + clear_hook_list(hooks); return cb_data.rc; }Which we can see here will call clear_hook_list(), so far so good, but then...quoted
int run_hooks_oneshot(const char *hook_name, struct run_hooks_opt *options) { - const char *hook_path; - int ret; + struct list_head *hooks; + int ret = 0; struct run_hooks_opt hook_opt_scratch = RUN_HOOKS_OPT_INIT; if (!options)@@ -233,14 +272,19 @@ int run_hooks_oneshot(const char *hook_name, struct run_hooks_opt *options) if (options->path_to_stdin && options->feed_pipe) BUG("choose only one method to populate stdin"); - hook_path = find_hook(hook_name); - if (!hook_path) { - ret = 0; + hooks = list_hooks(hook_name); + + /* + * If you need to act on a missing hook, use run_found_hooks() + * instead + */ + if (list_empty(hooks)) goto cleanup; - } - ret = run_hooks(hook_name, hook_path, options); + ret = run_hooks(hook_name, hooks, options); + cleanup: run_hooks_opt_clear(options); + clear_hook_list(hooks);...the oneshot command also does clear_hook_list(), after calling run_hooks() which cleared it already. That looks like a mistake, i.e. we should always trust run_hooks() to clear it, no?Ah, good catch. I will update the comment on run_hooks() and fix _oneshot() :) - Emily
I found a further memory issue with this, on "seen" running e.g. t0001
when compiled with SANITIZE=leak is broken by this series.
It's because in clear_hook_list() you clear the list of hooks, but
forget to clear the malloc'd container, so a missing free() fixes it. As
in the POC patch at the end of this mail.
But e.g. "git hook list <name>" is still broken, easy enough to fix,
just also needs fixing of the list_hooks_gently() callsites to e.g. this:
diff --git a/builtin/hook.c b/builtin/hook.c
index 50233366a8..2cd1831075 100644
--- a/builtin/hook.c
+++ b/builtin/hook.c
@@ -48,8 +48,10 @@ static int list(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix)
head = list_hooks_gently(hookname);
- if (list_empty(head))
+ if (list_empty(head)) {
+ clear_hook_list(head);
return 1;
+ }
list_for_each(pos, head) {
struct hook *item = list_entry(pos, struct hook, list);
Although going to that length to make the SANITIZE=leak run clean is
arguably overdoing it...
diff --git a/hook.c b/hook.c
index 23af86b9ea..e6e1e4173a 100644
--- a/hook.c
+++ b/hook.c@@ -67,6 +67,7 @@ void clear_hook_list(struct list_head *head) struct list_head *pos, *tmp; list_for_each_safe(pos, tmp, head) remove_hook(pos); + free(head); } static int known_hook(const char *name)
@@ -142,7 +143,16 @@ const char *find_hook_gently(const char *name) int hook_exists(const char *name) { - return !list_empty(list_hooks(name)); + struct list_head *hooks; + int exists; + + hooks = list_hooks(name); + + exists = !list_empty(hooks); + + clear_hook_list(hooks); + + return exists; } struct hook_config_cb