From: Thomas Gummerer <t.gummerer@gmail.com>
To: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, trast@student.ethz.ch, mhagger@alum.mit.edu,
pcouds@gmail.com, robin.rosenberg@dewire.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC v2 01/16] Modify cache_header to prepare for other index formats
Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2012 14:41:05 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120807124105.GA913@tgummerer> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7v8vds3jkj.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
On 08/05, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Thomas Gummerer <t.gummerer@gmail.com> writes:
>
> > diff --git a/read-cache.c b/read-cache.c
> > index 2f8159f..5d61d92 100644
> > --- a/read-cache.c
> > +++ b/read-cache.c
> > @@ -1433,7 +1446,7 @@ int read_index_from(struct index_state *istate, const char *path)
> >
> > errno = EINVAL;
> > mmap_size = xsize_t(st.st_size);
> > - if (mmap_size < sizeof(struct cache_header) + 20)
> > + if (mmap_size < sizeof(struct cache_version_header) + 20)
> > die("index file smaller than expected");
>
> At the design level, I have a large problem with this change. I
> understand that you wanted to make sure that some versions can lack
> the num-entries word in the header, but then what is the point of
> keeping that "+20" here? Are all versions of the file format still
> required to have the 20-byte trailing SHA-1 sum over the whole file?
No, index-v5 doesn't have the trailing SHA-1 over the whole file.
> Side note: I am actually fine with that "sum at the end"
> requirement, but then it needs to be documented what are
> assumed to be unomittable and why.
>
> I also do not see why v5 *needs* to drop the num-entries
> word from the header in the first place.
v5 still has the num-entries word, but at a different position.
The +20 however would still be wrong, because of the missing
SHA-1 over the file.
> At the practical level, we used to error out, upon seeing a file
> that claims to be v2 in the header but is too small to hold the
> version header, the number of entries word and the trailing SHA-1
> sum. We no longer do this and happily call verify_hdr() in the
> following code even when the file is too small, no?
This part is called even before we know what version of the index
we will read, and before the file is mmaped. The best solution
i think is to drop the check and just call verify_hdr, since it will
check the checksum anyway and detect the error, while not having
a big cost on a index file that is very small.
> > @@ -1442,11 +1455,13 @@ int read_index_from(struct index_state *istate, const char *path)
> > die_errno("unable to map index file");
> >
> > hdr = mmap;
> > + hdr_v2 = mmap + sizeof(*hdr);
> > if (verify_hdr(hdr, mmap_size) < 0)
> > goto unmap;
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-08-07 12:41 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 59+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-08-05 21:48 [PATCH/RFC v2 0/16] Introduce index file format version 5 Thomas Gummerer
2012-08-05 21:48 ` [PATCH/RFC v2 01/16] Modify cache_header to prepare for other index formats Thomas Gummerer
2012-08-06 1:17 ` Junio C Hamano
2012-08-07 12:41 ` Thomas Gummerer [this message]
2012-08-07 15:45 ` Junio C Hamano
2012-08-05 21:48 ` [PATCH/RFC v2 02/16] Modify read functions " Thomas Gummerer
2012-08-05 21:49 ` [PATCH/RFC v2 03/16] Modify match_stat_basic " Thomas Gummerer
2012-08-05 21:49 ` [PATCH/RFC v2 04/16] Modify write functions " Thomas Gummerer
2012-08-06 1:34 ` Junio C Hamano
2012-08-07 12:50 ` Thomas Gummerer
2012-08-05 21:49 ` [PATCH/RFC v2 05/16] t2104: Don't fail for index versions other than [23] Thomas Gummerer
2012-08-06 1:36 ` Junio C Hamano
2012-08-05 21:49 ` [PATCH/RFC v2 06/16] t3700: sleep for 1 second, to avoid interfering with the racy code Thomas Gummerer
2012-08-06 1:43 ` Junio C Hamano
2012-08-07 16:59 ` Thomas Gummerer
2012-08-08 20:16 ` Junio C Hamano
2012-08-08 20:57 ` Junio C Hamano
2012-08-09 13:19 ` Thomas Gummerer
2012-08-09 16:51 ` Junio C Hamano
2012-08-09 22:51 ` Thomas Gummerer
2012-08-05 21:49 ` [PATCH/RFC v2 07/16] Add documentation of the index-v5 file format Thomas Gummerer
2012-08-05 21:49 ` [PATCH/RFC v2 08/16] Make in-memory format aware of stat_crc Thomas Gummerer
2012-08-06 1:46 ` Junio C Hamano
2012-08-07 19:02 ` Thomas Gummerer
2012-08-05 21:49 ` [PATCH/RFC v2 09/16] Read index-v5 Thomas Gummerer
2012-08-06 5:17 ` Junio C Hamano
2012-08-08 7:41 ` Thomas Gummerer
2012-08-08 16:49 ` Junio C Hamano
2012-08-08 20:44 ` Thomas Gummerer
2012-08-08 21:50 ` Junio C Hamano
2012-08-05 21:49 ` [PATCH/RFC v2 10/16] Read resolve-undo data Thomas Gummerer
2012-08-06 1:51 ` Junio C Hamano
2012-08-07 19:17 ` Thomas Gummerer
2012-08-05 21:49 ` [PATCH/RFC v2 11/16] Read cache-tree in index-v5 Thomas Gummerer
2012-08-05 21:49 ` [PATCH/RFC v2 12/16] Write index-v5 Thomas Gummerer
2012-08-05 21:49 ` [PATCH/RFC v2 13/16] Write index-v5 cache-tree data Thomas Gummerer
2012-08-05 21:49 ` [PATCH/RFC v2 14/16] Write resolve-undo data for index-v5 Thomas Gummerer
2012-08-05 21:49 ` [PATCH/RFC v2 15/16] update-index.c: add a force-rewrite option Thomas Gummerer
2012-08-06 1:58 ` Junio C Hamano
2012-08-08 7:31 ` Thomas Gummerer
2012-08-05 21:49 ` [PATCH/RFC v2 16/16] p0002-index.sh: add perf test for the index formats Thomas Gummerer
2012-08-06 14:35 ` [PATCH/RFC v2 0/16] Introduce index file format version 5 Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy
2012-08-06 14:35 ` [PATCH 1/2] Move index v2 specific code out of read-cache Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy
2012-08-06 14:36 ` [PATCH 2/2] Add index-v5 Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy
2012-08-07 21:52 ` Robin Rosenberg
2012-08-08 10:54 ` Thomas Gummerer
2012-08-06 15:51 ` [PATCH/RFC v2 0/16] Introduce index file format version 5 Junio C Hamano
2012-08-06 16:06 ` Thomas Gummerer
2012-08-06 17:46 ` Junio C Hamano
2012-08-07 12:16 ` Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy
2012-08-08 1:38 ` Junio C Hamano
2012-08-08 13:54 ` Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy
2012-08-08 16:31 ` Junio C Hamano
2012-08-09 2:28 ` Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy
2012-08-07 22:31 ` Thomas Rast
2012-08-07 23:26 ` Junio C Hamano
2012-08-08 9:07 ` Thomas Rast
2012-08-08 22:47 ` Junio C Hamano
2012-08-08 10:30 ` Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20120807124105.GA913@tgummerer \
--to=t.gummerer@gmail.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=mhagger@alum.mit.edu \
--cc=pcouds@gmail.com \
--cc=robin.rosenberg@dewire.com \
--cc=trast@student.ethz.ch \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).