On 2/24/2022 5:35 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > "Derrick Stolee via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > >> - graph_data->generation = get_be64(g->chunk_generation_data_overflow + 8 * offset_pos); >> + graph_data->generation = item->date + get_be64(g->chunk_generation_data_overflow + 8 * offset_pos); > > Wow, that's embarrassing. > >> diff --git a/t/t5318-commit-graph.sh b/t/t5318-commit-graph.sh >> index 1afee1c2705..5e4b0216fa6 100755 >> --- a/t/t5318-commit-graph.sh >> +++ b/t/t5318-commit-graph.sh >> @@ -815,6 +815,19 @@ test_expect_success 'corrupt commit-graph write (missing tree)' ' >> ) >> ' >> >> +# The remaining tests check timestamps that flow over >> +# 32-bits. The graph_git_behavior checks can't take a >> +# prereq, so just stop here if we are on a 32-bit machine. >> + >> +if ! test_have_prereq TIME_IS_64BIT >> +then >> + test_done >> +fi >> +if ! test_have_prereq TIME_T_IS_64BIT >> +then >> + test_done >> +fi > > The above is OK but is there a reason why we cannot do > > if A || B > then > test_done > fi > > here (I am assuming not, but in case I am missing the reason why it > has to be separate)? Does not need to be separate. I just discovered the two different prereqs for similar, but not exact, checks. I can swap this to an or statement. >> @@ -832,10 +845,10 @@ test_expect_success 'corrupt commit-graph write (missing tree)' ' >> # The largest offset observed is 2 ^ 31, just large enough to overflow. >> # >> >> -test_expect_success 'set up and verify repo with generation data overflow chunk' ' >> +test_expect_success TIME_IS_64BIT,TIME_T_IS_64BIT 'set up and verify repo with generation data overflow chunk' ' >> objdir=".git/objects" && >> UNIX_EPOCH_ZERO="@0 +0000" && >> - FUTURE_DATE="@2147483646 +0000" && >> + FUTURE_DATE="@4000000000 +0000" && > > OK. 16#EE6B2800 too large to fit and will cause wrapping around with > signed 32-bit integer. Right. I wanted it to be right on that boundary of needing the 32nd bit but not being over that on its own. I did check that without the prereqs this code fails on 32-bit systems due to parsing the time. Thanks, -Stolee
