On Thu, Jun 27, 2019 at 7:54 PM Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@xxxxxx> wrote: > > Hi Duy, > > On Mon, 24 Jun 2019, Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy wrote: > > > diff --git a/builtin/grep.c b/builtin/grep.c > > index 580fd38f41..85da7ee542 100644 > > --- a/builtin/grep.c > > +++ b/builtin/grep.c > > @@ -458,7 +458,8 @@ static int grep_submodule(struct grep_opt *opt, > > object = parse_object_or_die(oid, oid_to_hex(oid)); > > > > grep_read_lock(); > > - data = read_object_with_reference(&object->oid, tree_type, > > + data = read_object_with_reference(opt->repo, > > + &object->oid, tree_type, > > Junio's hunch was absolutely spot on. This conversion is incorrect. If you > replace this `opt->repo` and... > > > &size, NULL); > > grep_read_unlock(); > > > > @@ -623,7 +624,8 @@ static int grep_object(struct grep_opt *opt, const struct pathspec *pathspec, > > int hit, len; > > > > grep_read_lock(); > > - data = read_object_with_reference(&obj->oid, tree_type, > > + data = read_object_with_reference(opt->repo, > > ... this one with `the_repository`, t7814 starts passing again. > > It makes me very wary of this patch series that this bug has only been > caught by a CI build. You probably did not run the test suite before > sending this patch series. I did. After Junio reported, I've ran a lot more and had the same pass/fail-sometimes behavior. > I also wonder what the rationale was to deviate from the strategy used in > the remainder of the call sites, where no attempt was made to use an > already-available repository pointer that might, or might not, be the > correct one. My strategy has always been "use the right repo if available, fall back to the_repo otherwise". This code path has struct repo, my mistake was not realize soon enough that there are two repos, not once (Ironically I made the conversion to add subrepo here). > It strikes me as a pretty important goal of this patch series to _not_ > change any behavior, and this bug makes me dubious that all diligence has > been done to assure that. Sooner or later all the_repo must be converted, what makes _this_ series different from other conversion series? Yes I slipped, I should have been more careful to the parts related to submodule. -- Duy
