On Mon, Jul 29, 2024 at 09:27:45PM +0800, shejialuo wrote: > diff --git a/refs/files-backend.c b/refs/files-backend.c > index cb184953c1..0d4fc27768 100644 > --- a/refs/files-backend.c > +++ b/refs/files-backend.c > @@ -3419,6 +3419,27 @@ typedef int (*files_fsck_refs_fn)(struct fsck_options *o, > const char *refs_check_dir, > struct dir_iterator *iter); > > +static int files_fsck_refs_name(struct fsck_options *o, > + const char *gitdir UNUSED, > + const char *refs_check_dir, > + struct dir_iterator *iter) > +{ > + struct strbuf sb = STRBUF_INIT; > + struct fsck_refs_info info; > + int ret = 0; > + > + if (check_refname_format(iter->basename, REFNAME_ALLOW_ONELEVEL)) { > + strbuf_addf(&sb, "%s/%s", refs_check_dir, iter->relative_path); > + info.path = sb.buf; > + ret = fsck_refs_report(o, NULL, &info, > + FSCK_MSG_BAD_REF_NAME, > + "invalid refname format"); > + } > + > + strbuf_release(&sb); > + return ret; > +} > + > static int files_fsck_refs_dir(struct ref_store *ref_store, > struct fsck_options *o, > const char *refs_check_dir, > @@ -3469,6 +3490,7 @@ static int files_fsck_refs(struct ref_store *ref_store, > struct fsck_options *o) > { > files_fsck_refs_fn fsck_refs_fns[]= { > + files_fsck_refs_name, > NULL Neat. I very much like that we can simply add new checks to this function and the rest is handled for us already. Makes this whole thing nicely extensible. > }; > > diff --git a/t/t0602-reffiles-fsck.sh b/t/t0602-reffiles-fsck.sh > new file mode 100755 > index 0000000000..b2db58d2c6 > --- /dev/null > +++ b/t/t0602-reffiles-fsck.sh > @@ -0,0 +1,101 @@ > +#!/bin/sh > + > +test_description='Test reffiles backend consistency check' > + > +GIT_TEST_DEFAULT_INITIAL_BRANCH_NAME=main > +export GIT_TEST_DEFAULT_INITIAL_BRANCH_NAME > +GIT_TEST_DEFAULT_REF_FORMAT=files > +export GIT_TEST_DEFAULT_REF_FORMAT > + > +. ./test-lib.sh Is this test suite intentionally not marked with `TEST_PASSES_SANITIZE_LEAK=true`? > + > +test_expect_success 'ref name should be checked' ' > + test_when_finished "rm -rf repo" && > + git init repo && > + branch_dir_prefix=.git/refs/heads && > + tag_dir_prefix=.git/refs/tags && > + ( > + cd repo && > + git commit --allow-empty -m initial && > + git checkout -b branch-1 && > + git tag tag-1 && > + git commit --allow-empty -m second && > + git checkout -b branch-2 && > + git tag tag-2 && > + git tag multi_hierarchy/tag-2 > + ) && I don't quite get why you create several subshells only to cd into `repo` in each of them. Isn't a single subshell sufficient for all of those tests? If you want to delimit blocks, then you can simply add an empty newline between them. > + ( > + cd repo && > + cp $branch_dir_prefix/branch-1 $branch_dir_prefix/.branch-1 && > + test_must_fail git fsck 2>err && > + cat >expect <<-EOF && > + error: refs/heads/.branch-1: badRefName: invalid refname format > + EOF > + rm $branch_dir_prefix/.branch-1 && > + test_cmp expect err > + ) && > + ( > + cd repo && > + cp $tag_dir_prefix/tag-1 $tag_dir_prefix/tag-1.lock && > + test_must_fail git fsck 2>err && > + cat >expect <<-EOF && > + error: refs/tags/tag-1.lock: badRefName: invalid refname format > + EOF > + rm $tag_dir_prefix/tag-1.lock && > + test_cmp expect err > + ) && The other cases all make sense, but I don't think that a file ending with ".lock" should be marked as having a "badRefName". It is expected that concurrent writers may have such lock files. What could make sense is to eventually mark stale lock files older than X amount of time as errors or warnings. But I'd think that this is outside of the scope of this patch series. Patrick
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature