Re: [PATCH v1 2/3] config: introduce repo_config_set* functions

3 messages, 2 authors, 2021-11-15 · open the first message on its own page

Re: [PATCH v1 2/3] config: introduce repo_config_set* functions

From: Junio C Hamano <hidden>
Date: 2021-11-11 20:24:50

Glen Choo [off-list ref] writes:
We have git_config_set() that sets a config value for the_repository's
config file, and repo_config_get* that reads config values from a struct
repository. Thus, it seems reasonable to have to have
repo_git_config_set() that can set values for a config file of a struct
repository.

Implement repo_config_set() and repo_config_set_gently(), which
take struct repository. However, unlike other instances where struct
repository is added to a repo_* function, this patch does not change the
implementations of git_config_set() or git_config_set_gently(); those
functions use the_repository much deeper in their call chain through
git_pathdup(). Mark this inconsistency as NEEDSWORK.
Being able to only affect "config" in the_repository->gitdir is less
flexible than being able to affect "config" in repo->gitdir for any
repository is good.  Do we need a similar thing for repo->commondir
as well?
+/*
+ * Sets a config value in a repository.
+ */
+int repo_config_set_gently(struct repository *r, const char *key,
+			   const char *value)
+{
+	int ret;
+	char *path;
+
+	path = repo_git_path(r, "config");
+	ret = git_config_set_in_file_gently(path, key, value);
+	free(path);
+	return ret;
+}
+
+void repo_config_set(struct repository *r, const char *key, const char *value)
+{
+	char *path;
+
+	path = repo_git_path(r, "config");
+	git_config_set_in_file(path, key, value);
+	free(path);
+}
Many questions:

 - What do these do for an existing key?  Add another value?
   Replace existing one?  If the latter, what do we plan to do with
   multi-valued keys?

 - Don't we need an interface to remove, rename, etc.?

 - If we call repo_config_set(repo, "key", "value") and then call
   repo_git_config_string(repo, "key", &value) on the same
   repository, do we read the value back or do we give a stale
   value?

 - A change like this should make existing config_set() that only
   works on the_repository into a thin wrapper, e.g.

	void git_config_set(const char *keyu, const char **value)
	{
		repo_config_set(the_repository, key, value);
	}

   But that is not happening here.  What prevents us from doing so?

Thanks.

Re: [PATCH v1 2/3] config: introduce repo_config_set* functions

From: Glen Choo <hidden>
Date: 2021-11-12 00:45:57

Junio C Hamano [off-list ref] writes:
Glen Choo [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
We have git_config_set() that sets a config value for the_repository's
config file, and repo_config_get* that reads config values from a struct
repository. Thus, it seems reasonable to have to have
repo_git_config_set() that can set values for a config file of a struct
repository.

Implement repo_config_set() and repo_config_set_gently(), which
take struct repository. However, unlike other instances where struct
repository is added to a repo_* function, this patch does not change the
implementations of git_config_set() or git_config_set_gently(); those
functions use the_repository much deeper in their call chain through
git_pathdup(). Mark this inconsistency as NEEDSWORK.
Being able to only affect "config" in the_repository->gitdir is less
flexible than being able to affect "config" in repo->gitdir for any
repository is good.  Do we need a similar thing for repo->commondir
as well?
git_config_set() can only affect repo->gitdir, so from the perspective
of "what should a repo_* variant of git_config_set() do", then no, we do
not need a similar thing. As far as I can tell, config.c only works with
the gitdir, not the commondir.

I cannot comment on whether we will ever need to set config values in
the commondir.
Many questions:

 - What do these do for an existing key?  Add another value?
   Replace existing one?  If the latter, what do we plan to do with
   multi-valued keys?
For an existing key, this should replace the first instance found.
This eventually calls of git_config_set_multivar_in_file_gently() with
value_pattern=NULL, flags = 0. According to the comments:

 * if flags contains the CONFIG_FLAGS_MULTI_REPLACE flag, all matching
 *     key/values are removed before a single new pair is written. If the
 *     flag is not present, then replace only the first match.

We pass flags=0, so only the first instance is replaced.

 * - [value_pattern] as a string. It will disregard key/value pairs where value
 *   does not match.

We pass value_pattern=NULL, so we consider all instances.
 - Don't we need an interface to remove, rename, etc.?
This function supports 'remove' by passing value=NULL. By rename, I
believe you're referring to renaming a config section, e.g. a repo_*
version of git_config_copy_or_rename_section_in_file()?

I think this is warranted if we perform a full plumbing of struct
repository through config.c. But I think it would be prudent to do this
plumbing piecemeal - perhaps starting with "set", and then proceeding to
the other operations. 
 - If we call repo_config_set(repo, "key", "value") and then call
   repo_git_config_string(repo, "key", &value) on the same
   repository, do we read the value back or do we give a stale
   value?
We read the correct value if repo == the_repository but we do not if r
!= the_repository. Thanks for spotting this bug.

I believe your concern comes from the fact that struct repository
caches config values in repo->config and thus we are not guaranteed to
read the value back from the file. Following this train of thought, we
can see that git_config_set_multivar_in_file_gently() clears the cache
for the_repository, by calling git_config_clear(). Because this is
hardcoded to the_repository, git_config_set_multivar_in_file_gently()
cannot be safely called from repo_config_set() and my implementation is
buggy.
 - A change like this should make existing config_set() that only
   works on the_repository into a thin wrapper, e.g.

	void git_config_set(const char *keyu, const char **value)
	{
		repo_config_set(the_repository, key, value);
	}

   But that is not happening here.  What prevents us from doing so?
I think it is _possible_, as long as we plumb struct repository through
the call chain all the way to git_config_set_multivar_in_file_gently().

I didn't do so because I thought that I had an implementation of
repo_config_set() without introducing a major overhaul of config.c.
Because it is an alternative implementation, I decided not to replace
the existing one.

However, as noted above, this alternative implementation is wrong
because git_config_set_multivar_in_file_gently() makes use of
the_repository (i.e. I didn't read the function carefully enough).

I will attempt this plumbing, which will allow us to make
git_config_set() a thin wrapper. However, if this turns out to be too
difficult, I will implement branch --recurse-submodules with child
processes and leave this for a future clean up (as hinted at in the
cover letter).

Re: [PATCH v1 2/3] config: introduce repo_config_set* functions

From: Glen Choo <hidden>
Date: 2021-11-15 23:16:11

Glen Choo [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
 - A change like this should make existing config_set() that only
   works on the_repository into a thin wrapper, e.g.

	void git_config_set(const char *keyu, const char **value)
	{
		repo_config_set(the_repository, key, value);
	}

   But that is not happening here.  What prevents us from doing so?
I think it is _possible_, as long as we plumb struct repository through
the call chain all the way to git_config_set_multivar_in_file_gently().

[...]

I will attempt this plumbing, which will allow us to make
git_config_set() a thin wrapper. However, if this turns out to be too
difficult, I will implement branch --recurse-submodules with child
processes and leave this for a future clean up (as hinted at in the
cover letter).
I believe that this plumbing is already doable but it would take an
extensive overhaul of config.c as well as some cleanup of path.c.

This is more work than I am willing to take on right now, but I'll
revisit this at some point.
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help