Re: [PATCH] filter-branch: resolve $commit^{tree} in no-index case

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> writes:

> In other words, I do not think "broken tree object may look the same
> to diff-tree, but I do want to replace it" is relevant to this
> codepath; it is not something this function handles, I think.
>
> What am I not seeing?

One thing that I was not seeing is that "diff-tree --quiet" (without
any magic options like -ignore-whitespace that may make two
different tree object judged to be the same, and without -C -C that
forces it to recurse into identical subtrees) lacks an obvious and
stupid optimization to say "they are the same" or "they are
different when given two tree object names without opening the
tree(s).  So if you make it compare a rewritten and corrected tree
and an incorrect and possibly broken one, it may try to read the
tree data from the latter and comparison can lead to incorrect
results.

A consequence of this is if you are running filter-branch without
any tree filters (i.e. no_index) but with "--prune-empty", and a
commit and its parent actually have different trees but one (or
both) of them are broken, "diff-tree" _might_ say "they are the
same" and you end up skipping a commit when you do not want to.  If
your plan was to run another round of filter-branch, this time with
a "broken tree encoding correction" tree-filter, on the result of
the first "--prune-empty" filtering, we would definitely end up with
a wrong history.

But for such a case, I would say you should be running the
correction filter as the very first thing.  So I am not sure if it
matters in practice.

One possible action item out of this is that we might want to think
about giving the obvious and stupid optimization to such invocation
of "diff-tree --quiet".  I _think_ we correctly avoid descending
into the identical subtrees while doing a recursive diff-tree by
saying "hey these two corresponding directories have the same tree
object names", but there is no fundamental reason why we shouldn't
be doing the same optimization at the top-level of the comparison.
--
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



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]