Hi Phillip,
Thanks again for helping with this! a few comments/questions below:
On 10 Feb 2022, at 5:57, Phillip Wood wrote:
> Hi John
>
> I've concentrated on the tests as others have commented on the implementation
>
> On 10/02/2022 04:01, John Cai via GitGitGadget wrote:
>> From: John Cai <johncai86@xxxxxxxxx>
>> [...]
>> diff --git a/t/t1006-cat-file.sh b/t/t1006-cat-file.sh
>> index 145eee11df9..a20c8dae85d 100755
>> --- a/t/t1006-cat-file.sh
>> +++ b/t/t1006-cat-file.sh
>> @@ -177,6 +177,24 @@ $content"
>> test_cmp expect actual
>> '
>> + for opt in --buffer --no-buffer
>> + do
>> + test -z "$content" ||
>> + test_expect_success "--batch-command $opt output of $type content is correct" '
>> + maybe_remove_timestamp "$batch_output" $no_ts >expect &&
>> + maybe_remove_timestamp "$(test_write_lines "contents $sha1" \
>> + | git cat-file --batch-command $opt)" $no_ts >actual &&
>> + test_cmp expect actual
>> + '
>> +
>> + test_expect_success "--batch-command $opt output of $type info is correct" '
>> + echo "$sha1 $type $size" >expect &&
>> + test_write_lines "info $sha1" \
>> + | git cat-file --batch-command $opt >actual &&
>> + test_cmp expect actual
>> + '
>> + done
>> +
>> test_expect_success "custom --batch-check format" '
>> echo "$type $sha1" >expect &&
>> echo $sha1 | git cat-file --batch-check="%(objecttype) %(objectname)" >actual &&
>> @@ -213,6 +231,70 @@ $content"
>> '
>> }
>> +run_buffer_test_flush () {
>> + type=$1
>> + sha1=$2
>> + size=$3
>> +
>> + mkfifo input &&
>> + test_when_finished 'rm input' &&
>> + mkfifo output &&
>> + exec 9<>output &&
>> + test_when_finished 'rm output; exec 9<&-'
>> + (
>> + # TODO - Ideally we'd pipe the output of cat-file
>> + # through "sed s'/$/\\/'" to make sure that that read
>> + # would consume all the available
>> + # output. Unfortunately we cannot do this as we cannot
>> + # control when sed flushes its output. We could write
>> + # a test helper in C that appended a '\' to the end of
>> + # each line and flushes its output after every line.
>> + git cat-file --buffer --batch-command <input 2>err &
>> + echo $! &&
>> + wait $!
>> + ) >&9 &
>> + sh_pid=$! &&
>> + read cat_file_pid <&9 &&
>> + test_when_finished "kill $cat_file_pid
>> + kill $sh_pid; wait $sh_pid; :" &&
>> + echo "$sha1 $type $size" >expect &&
>> + test_write_lines "info $sha1" flush "info $sha1" >input
>
> This closes input and so cat-file exits and flushes its output - therefore you are not testing whether flush actually flushes. When I wrote this test in[1] this line was inside a subshell that was redirected to the input fifo so that the read happened before cat-file exited. This test is also not testing the exit code of cat-file or that the output is flushed on exit. Is there a reason you can't just use the test as I wrote it? I'm happy to explain anything that isn't clear.
I've restored the tests in the form you suggested. I had removed some lines to simplify the test but as it turns out I removed some of the important aspects of the test.
Here are my modifications to the tests you helped me with. Let me know if these changes make sense, or if I'm missing something.
> @@ -3,6 +3,7 @@ run_buffer_test_flush () {
> sha1=$2
> size=$3
>
> + rm -f input output &&
on my end some tests were hanging because these files were not getting removed
by test_when_finished.
> mkfifo input &&
> test_when_finished 'rm input'
> mkfifo output &&
> @@ -26,7 +27,7 @@ run_buffer_test_flush () {
> test_when_finished "kill $cat_file_pid
> kill $sh_pid; wait $sh_pid; :" &&
> (
> - test_write_lines "info $sha1" fflush "info $sha1" &&
> + test_write_lines "info $sha1" flush "info $sha1" &&
> # TODO - consume all available input, not just one
> # line (see above).
> read actual <&9 &&
> @@ -48,13 +49,14 @@ run_buffer_test_no_flush () {
> sha1=$2
> size=$3
>
> + touch output &&
It looks like test_must_be_empty expects a file, and if output is never written
to it doesn't open the file.
> mkfifo input &&
> test_when_finished 'rm input'
> mkfifo pid &&
> exec 9<>pid &&
> test_when_finished 'rm pid; exec 9<&-'
> (
> - git cat-file --buffer --batch-command <input >output &
> + git cat-file --buffer --batch-command <input >>output &
> echo $! &&
> wait $!
> echo $?
> @@ -67,7 +69,7 @@ run_buffer_test_no_flush () {
> test_write_lines "info $sha1" "info $sha1" &&
> kill $cat_file_pid &&
> read status <&9 &&
> - test "$status" -ne 0 &&
> - test_must_be_empty output
> - ) >input
> + test "$status" -ne 0
> + ) >input &&
> + test_must_be_empty output
I wanted to ask about this, because the test hung here. I surmised that it was
because we are checking the output before writing to the input.
> }
>
>> + # TODO - consume all available input, not just one
>> + # line (see above).
>> + read actual <&9 &&
>> + echo "$actual" >actual &&
>> + test_cmp expect actual &&
>> + test_must_be_empty err
>> +}
>> +
>> +run_buffer_test_no_flush () {
>> + type=$1
>> + sha1=$2
>> + size=$3
>> +
>> + touch output &&
>> + test_when_finished 'rm output' &&
>> + mkfifo input &&
>> + test_when_finished 'rm input' &&
>> + mkfifo pid &&
>> + exec 9<>pid &&
>> + test_when_finished 'rm pid; exec 9<&-'
>> + (
>> + git cat-file --buffer --batch-command <input >output &
>> + echo $! &&
>> + wait $!
>> + echo $?
>> + ) >&9 &
>> + sh_pid=$! &&
>> + read cat_file_pid <&9 &&
>> + test_when_finished "kill $cat_file_pid
>> + kill $sh_pid; wait $sh_pid; :" &&
>> + test_write_lines "info $sha1" "info $sha1" &&
>
> This prints to stdout rather than piping into cat-file so it would not produce any output even if it exited normally. In my original[1] this line is inside a subshell that is redirected to the input fifo.
>
>> + kill $cat_file_pid &&
>> + read status <&9 &&
>> + test_must_be_empty output
>> +}
>> +
>> hello_content="Hello World"
>> hello_size=$(strlen "$hello_content")
>> hello_sha1=$(echo_without_newline "$hello_content" | git hash-object --stdin)
>> @@ -224,6 +306,14 @@ test_expect_success "setup" '
>> run_tests 'blob' $hello_sha1 $hello_size "$hello_content" "$hello_content"
>> +test_expect_success PIPE '--batch-command --buffer with flush for blob info' '
>> + run_buffer_test_flush blob $hello_sha1 $hello_size
>> +'
>> +
>> +test_expect_success PIPE '--batch-command --buffer without flush for blob info' '
>> + run_buffer_test_no_flush blob $hello_sha1 $hello_size false
>> +'
>
> If we need to run the flush tests for each object type then could they go inside run_tests? Personally I think I'd be happy just to test the flush command on one object type.
yeah, that makes sense
>
>> test_expect_success '--batch-check without %(rest) considers whole line' '
>> echo "$hello_sha1 blob $hello_size" >expect &&
>> git update-index --add --cacheinfo 100644 $hello_sha1 "white space" &&
>> @@ -238,6 +328,14 @@ tree_pretty_content="100644 blob $hello_sha1 hello"
>> run_tests 'tree' $tree_sha1 $tree_size "" "$tree_pretty_content"
>> +test_expect_success PIPE '--batch-command --buffer with flush for tree info' '
>> + run_buffer_test_flush tree $tree_sha1 $tree_size
>> +'
>> +
>> +test_expect_success PIPE '--batch-command --buffer without flush for tree info' '
>> + run_buffer_test_no_flush tree $tree_sha1 $tree_size false
>> +'
>> +
>> commit_message="Initial commit"
>> commit_sha1=$(echo_without_newline "$commit_message" | git commit-tree $tree_sha1)
>> commit_size=$(($(test_oid hexsz) + 137))
>> @@ -249,6 +347,14 @@ $commit_message"
>> run_tests 'commit' $commit_sha1 $commit_size "$commit_content" "$commit_content" 1
>> +test_expect_success PIPE '--batch-command --buffer with flush for commit info' '
>> + run_buffer_test_flush commit $commit_sha1 $commit_size
>> +'
>> +
>> +test_expect_success PIPE '--batch-command --buffer without flush for commit info' '
>> + run_buffer_test_no_flush commit $commit_sha1 $commit_size false
>> +'
>> +
>> tag_header_without_timestamp="object $hello_sha1
>> type blob
>> tag hellotag
>> @@ -263,11 +369,19 @@ tag_size=$(strlen "$tag_content")
>> run_tests 'tag' $tag_sha1 $tag_size "$tag_content" "$tag_content" 1
>> +test_expect_success PIPE '--batch-command --buffer with flush for tag info' '
>> + run_buffer_test_flush tag $tag_sha1 $tag_size
>> +'
>> +
>> +test_expect_success PIPE '--batch-command --buffer without flush for tag info' '
>> + run_buffer_test_no_flush tag $tag_sha1 $tag_size false
>> +'
>> +
>> test_expect_success \
>> "Reach a blob from a tag pointing to it" \
>> "test '$hello_content' = \"\$(git cat-file blob $tag_sha1)\""
>> -for batch in batch batch-check
>> +for batch in batch batch-check batch-command
>> do
>> for opt in t s e p
>> do
>> @@ -373,6 +487,72 @@ test_expect_success "--batch-check with multiple sha1s gives correct format" '
>> "$(echo_without_newline "$batch_check_input" | git cat-file --batch-check)"
>> '
>> +batch_command_info_input="info $hello_sha1
>> +info $tree_sha1
>> +info $commit_sha1
>> +info $tag_sha1
>> +info deadbeef
>
> I know there are existing uses of the constant in the file but I'm not thrilled about adding more.
>
>> +flush
>
> This flush in redundant isn't it
true, we don't actually need it
>
>> +"
>> +
>> +batch_command_info_output="$hello_sha1 blob $hello_size
>> +$tree_sha1 tree $tree_size
>> +$commit_sha1 commit $commit_size
>> +$tag_sha1 tag $tag_size
>> +deadbeef missing"
>> +
>> +test_expect_success "--batch-command with multiple info calls gives correct format" '
>
> double quotes are generally reserved for test titles that use parameter substitution which this one does not.
>
>> + test "$batch_command_info_output" = "$(echo_without_newline \
>> + "$batch_command_info_input" | git cat-file --batch-command --buffer)"
>> +'
>
> This test and the one below are quite hard to follow. These days we try to avoid using test to compare strings as when it fails it does not provide any clues as to what when wrong. Instead we use here documents and test_cmp so that when a test fails you can see what went wrong. Also the setup happens inside the test
>
> test_expect_success '--batch-command with multiple info calls gives correct format' '
> batch_command_info_input="info $hello_sha1\
> info $tree_sha1\
> info $commit_sha1\
> info $tag_sha1\
> info deadbeef\
> flush"
>
> cat >expect <<-EOF &&
> $hello_sha1 blob $hello_size
> $tree_sha1 tree $tree_size
> $commit_sha1 commit $commit_size
> $tag_sha1 tag $tag_size
> deadbeef missing
> EOF
>
> echo_without_newline "$batch_command_info_input" | git cat-file --batch-command --buffer >actual &&
> test_cmp expect actual
> '
sounds good, will adjust
>
>> +batch_command_contents_input="contents $hello_sha1
>> +contents $commit_sha1
>> +contents $tag_sha1
>> +contents deadbeef
>> +flush
>> +"
>> +
>> +batch_command_output="$hello_sha1 blob $hello_size
>> +$hello_content
>> +$commit_sha1 commit $commit_size
>> +$commit_content
>> +$tag_sha1 tag $tag_size
>> +$tag_content
>> +deadbeef missing"
>> +
>> +test_expect_success "--batch-command with multiple contents calls gives correct format" '
>> + test "$(maybe_remove_timestamp "$batch_command_output" 1)" = \
>> + "$(maybe_remove_timestamp "$(echo_without_newline "$batch_command_contents_input" | git cat-file --batch-command)" 1)"
>> +'
>> +
>> +batch_command_mixed_input="info $hello_sha1
>> +contents $hello_sha1
>> +info $commit_sha1
>> +contents $commit_sha1
>> +info $tag_sha1
>> +contents $tag_sha1
>> +contents deadbeef
>> +flush
>> +"
>> +
>> +batch_command_mixed_output="$hello_sha1 blob $hello_size
>> +$hello_sha1 blob $hello_size
>> +$hello_content
>> +$commit_sha1 commit $commit_size
>> +$commit_sha1 commit $commit_size
>> +$commit_content
>> +$tag_sha1 tag $tag_size
>> +$tag_sha1 tag $tag_size
>> +$tag_content
>> +deadbeef missing"
>> +
>> +test_expect_success "--batch-command with mixed calls gives correct format" '
>> + test "$(maybe_remove_timestamp "$batch_command_mixed_output" 1)" = \
>> + "$(maybe_remove_timestamp "$(echo_without_newline \
>> + "$batch_command_mixed_input" | git cat-file --batch-command --buffer)" 1)"
>> +'
>> +
>> test_expect_success 'setup blobs which are likely to delta' '
>> test-tool genrandom foo 10240 >foo &&
>> { cat foo && echo plus; } >foo-plus &&
>> @@ -963,5 +1143,34 @@ test_expect_success 'cat-file --batch-all-objects --batch-check ignores replace'
>> echo "$orig commit $orig_size" >expect &&
>> test_cmp expect actual
>> '
>> +test_expect_success 'batch-command empty command' '
>> + echo "" >cmd &&
>> + test_expect_code 128 git cat-file --batch-command <cmd 2>err &&
>> + grep -E "^fatal:.*empty command in input.*" err
>> +'
>
> This test and the ones below look good but they don't need to pass -E to grep are they are not using an extended regex.
>
> Best Wishes
>
> Phillip
>
> [1] https://lore.kernel.org/git/e75ba9ea-fdda-6e9f-4dd6-24190117d93b@xxxxxxxxx
>
>> +test_expect_success 'batch-command whitespace before command' '
>> + echo " info deadbeef" >cmd &&
>> + test_expect_code 128 git cat-file --batch-command <cmd 2>err &&
>> + grep -E "^fatal:.*whitespace before command.*" err
>> +'
>> +
>> +test_expect_success 'batch-command unknown command' '
>> + echo unknown_command >cmd &&
>> + test_expect_code 128 git cat-file --batch-command <cmd 2>err &&
>> + grep -E "^fatal:.*unknown command.*" err
>> +'
>> +
>> +test_expect_success 'batch-command flush with arguments' '
>> + echo "flush arg" >cmd &&
>> + test_expect_code 128 git cat-file --batch-command --buffer <cmd 2>err &&
>> + grep -E "^fatal:.*flush takes no arguments.*" err
>> +'
>> +
>> +test_expect_success 'batch-command flush without --buffer' '
>> + echo "flush arg" >cmd &&
>> + test_expect_code 128 git cat-file --batch-command <cmd 2>err &&
>> + grep -E "^fatal:.*flush is only for --buffer mode.*" err
>> +'
>> test_done
