Am 18.10.2013 02:42, schrieb Karsten Blees: > Am 17.10.2013 23:07, schrieb Junio C Hamano: >> Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> writes: >> >>> Karsten Blees <karsten.blees@xxxxxxxxx> writes: >>> >>>> Am 16.10.2013 23:43, schrieb Junio C Hamano: >>>>> * kb/fast-hashmap (2013-09-25) 6 commits >>>>> - fixup! diffcore-rename.c: simplify finding exact renames >>>>> - diffcore-rename.c: use new hash map implementation >>>>> - diffcore-rename.c: simplify finding exact renames >>>>> - diffcore-rename.c: move code around to prepare for the next patch >>>>> - buitin/describe.c: use new hash map implementation >>>>> - add a hashtable implementation that supports O(1) removal >>>>> >>>> >>>> I posted a much more complete v3 [1], but somehow missed Jonathan's fixup! commit. >>> >>> Thanks; I'll replace the above with v3 and squash the fix-up in. >> >> Interestingly, v3 applied on 'maint' and then merged to 'master' >> seems to break t3600 and t7001 with a coredump. >> >> It would conflict with es/name-hash-no-trailing-slash-in-dirs that >> has been cooking in 'next', too; the resolution might be trivial but >> I didn't look too deeply into it. >> > > I've pushed a rebased version to https://github.com/kblees/git/commits/kb/hashmap-v3-next > (no changes yet except for Jonathan's fixup in #04 and merge resolution). > > The coredumps are caused by my patch #10, which free()s cache_entries when they are removed, in combination with submodule.c::stage_updated_gitmodules (5fee9952 "submodule.c: add .gitmodules staging helper functions"), which removes a cache_entry, then modifies and re-adds the (now) free()d memory. > > Can't we just use add_file_to_cache here (which replaces cache_entries by creating a copy)? No objections from my side. Looks like we could also copy the cache entry just before remove_cache_entry_at() and use that copy afterwards, but your solution is so much shorter that I would really like to use it (unless someone more cache-savvy than me has any objections). And by the way: this is the last use of remove_cache_entry_at(), would it make sense to remove that define while at it? Only the remove_index_entry_at() function it is defined to is currently used. > diff --git a/submodule.c b/submodule.c > index 1905d75..e388487 100644 > --- a/submodule.c > +++ b/submodule.c > @@ -116,30 +116,7 @@ int remove_path_from_gitmodules(const char *path) > > void stage_updated_gitmodules(void) > { > - struct strbuf buf = STRBUF_INIT; > - struct stat st; > - int pos; > - struct cache_entry *ce; > - int namelen = strlen(".gitmodules"); > - > - pos = cache_name_pos(".gitmodules", namelen); > - if (pos < 0) { > - warning(_("could not find .gitmodules in index")); > - return; > - } > - ce = active_cache[pos]; > - ce->ce_flags = namelen; > - if (strbuf_read_file(&buf, ".gitmodules", 0) < 0) > - die(_("reading updated .gitmodules failed")); > - if (lstat(".gitmodules", &st) < 0) > - die_errno(_("unable to stat updated .gitmodules")); > - fill_stat_cache_info(ce, &st); > - ce->ce_mode = ce_mode_from_stat(ce, st.st_mode); > - if (remove_cache_entry_at(pos) < 0) > - die(_("unable to remove .gitmodules from index")); > - if (write_sha1_file(buf.buf, buf.len, blob_type, ce->sha1)) > - die(_("adding updated .gitmodules failed")); > - if (add_cache_entry(ce, ADD_CACHE_OK_TO_ADD|ADD_CACHE_OK_TO_REPLACE)) > + if (add_file_to_cache(".gitmodules", 0)) > die(_("staging updated .gitmodules failed")); > } > > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in > the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html