From: John Keeping <john@keeping.me.uk>
To: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] merge-tree: fix "same file added in subdir"
Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2013 22:57:39 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130327225739.GT2286@serenity.lan> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7vk3osjwgv.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
On Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 03:42:40PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> John Keeping <john@keeping.me.uk> writes:
>
> > When the same file is added with identical content at the top level,
> > git-merge-tree prints "added in both" with the details. But if the file
> > is added in an existing subdirectory, threeway_callback() bails out early
> > because the two trees have been modified identically.
> >
> > In order to detect this, we need to fall through and recurse into the
> > subtree in this case.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: John Keeping <john@keeping.me.uk>
>
> The rationale the above description gives is internally consistent,
> but it is rather sad to see this optimization go. The primary
> motivation behind this program, which does not use the usual
> unpack-trees machinery, is to allow us to cull the identical result
> at a shallow level of the traversal when the both sides changed (not
> added) a file deep in a subdirectory hierarchy.
>
> The patch makes me wonder if we should go the other way around,
> resolving the "both added identically" case at the top cleanly
> without complaint.
I don't use merge-tree so I have no opinion on this, just wanted to fix
an inconsistency :-)
I'll try to have a look at doing the other change tomorrow if no one
else gets there first.
> > builtin/merge-tree.c | 9 +++++++--
> > t/t4300-merge-tree.sh | 17 +++++++++++++++++
> > 2 files changed, 24 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/builtin/merge-tree.c b/builtin/merge-tree.c
> > index e0d0b7d..ca97fbd 100644
> > --- a/builtin/merge-tree.c
> > +++ b/builtin/merge-tree.c
> > @@ -298,12 +298,17 @@ static int threeway_callback(int n, unsigned long mask, unsigned long dirmask, s
> > {
> > /* Same in both? */
> > if (same_entry(entry+1, entry+2)) {
> > - if (entry[0].sha1) {
> > + if (entry[0].sha1 && !S_ISDIR(entry[0].mode)) {
> > /* Modified identically */
> > resolve(info, NULL, entry+1);
> > return mask;
> > }
> > - /* "Both added the same" is left unresolved */
> > + /*
> > + * "Both added the same" is left unresolved. We also leave
> > + * "Both directories modified identically" unresolved in
> > + * order to catch changes where the same file (with the same
> > + * content) has been added to both directories.
> > + */
> > }
> >
> > if (same_entry(entry+0, entry+1)) {
> > diff --git a/t/t4300-merge-tree.sh b/t/t4300-merge-tree.sh
> > index d0b2a45..be0737e 100755
> > --- a/t/t4300-merge-tree.sh
> > +++ b/t/t4300-merge-tree.sh
> > @@ -298,4 +298,21 @@ test_expect_success 'turn tree to file' '
> > test_cmp expect actual
> > '
> >
> > +test_expect_success 'add identical files to subdir' '
> > + cat >expected <<\EXPECTED &&
> > +added in both
> > + our 100644 43d5a8ed6ef6c00ff775008633f95787d088285d sub/ONE
> > + their 100644 43d5a8ed6ef6c00ff775008633f95787d088285d sub/ONE
> > +EXPECTED
> > +
> > + git reset --hard initial &&
> > + mkdir sub &&
> > + test_commit "sub-initial" "sub/initial" "initial" &&
> > + test_commit "sub-add-a-b-same-A" "sub/ONE" "AAA" &&
> > + git reset --hard sub-initial &&
> > + test_commit "sub-add-a-b-same-B" "sub/ONE" "AAA" &&
> > + git merge-tree sub-initial sub-add-a-b-same-A sub-add-a-b-same-B >actual &&
> > + test_cmp expected actual
> > +'
> > +
> > test_done
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-03-27 22:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-03-27 21:34 [PATCH] merge-tree: fix "same file added in subdir" John Keeping
2013-03-27 22:42 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-03-27 22:57 ` John Keeping [this message]
2013-03-28 9:34 ` John Keeping
2013-04-07 20:12 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-04-07 21:07 ` [PATCH v2] merge-tree: don't print entries that match "local" John Keeping
2013-04-27 11:35 ` René Scharfe
2013-04-27 12:55 ` John Keeping
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=20130327225739.GT2286@serenity.lan \
--to=john@keeping.me.uk \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/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).