git.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
To: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Cc: "René Scharfe" <l.s.r@web.de>,
	"George Shammas" <georgyo@gmail.com>,
	git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: git merge -s subtree seems to be broken.
Date: Tue, 31 Jul 2018 15:04:59 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180731190459.GA3372@sigill.intra.peff.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180731172304.GA16977@sigill.intra.peff.net>

On Tue, Jul 31, 2018 at 01:23:04PM -0400, Jeff King wrote:

> On Tue, Jul 31, 2018 at 10:17:15AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> 
> > Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:
> > 
> > > +...
> > > +		} else if (cmp > 0) {
> > >  			/* path2 does not appear in one */
> > > +			score += score_missing(two.entry.mode, two.entry.path);
> > > +			update_tree_entry(&two);
> > > +			continue;
> > > +		} if (oidcmp(one.entry.oid, two.entry.oid)) {
> > 
> > As the earlier ones do the "continue at the end of the block", this
> > does not affect the correctness, but I think you either meant "else if"
> > or a fresh "if/else" that is disconnected from the previous if/else if/...
> > chain.
> 
> Yes, thanks. I actually started to write it without the "continue" at
> all, and a big "else" that checked the "we have both" case. But I backed
> that out (in favor of a smaller diff), and forgot to add back in the
> "else if".

So here it is fixed, and with a commit message. I'm not happy to omit a
regression test, but I actually couldn't come up with a minimal one that
tickled the problem, because we're playing around with heuristics. So I
compensated by probably over-explaining in the commit message. But
clearly this is not a well-tested code path given the length of time
between introducing and detecting the bug.

-- >8 --
Subject: [PATCH] score_trees(): fix iteration over trees with missing entries

In score_trees(), we walk over two sorted trees to find
which entries are missing or have different content between
the two.  So if we have two trees with these entries:

  one   two
  ---   ---
  a     a
  b     c
  c     d

we'd expect the loop to:

  - compare "a" to "a"

  - compare "b" to "c"; because these are sorted lists, we
    know that the second tree does not have "b"

  - compare "c" to "c"

  - compare "d" to end-of-list; we know that the first tree
    does not have "d"

And prior to d8febde370 (match-trees: simplify score_trees()
using tree_entry(), 2013-03-24) that worked. But after that
commit, we mistakenly increment the tree pointers for every
loop iteration, even when we've processed the entry for only
one side. As a result, we end up doing this:

  - compare "a" to "a"

  - compare "b" to "c"; we know that we do not have "b", but
    we still increment both tree pointers; at this point
    we're out of sync and all further comparisons are wrong

  - compare "c" to "d" and mistakenly claim that the second
    tree does not have "c"

  - exit the loop, mistakenly not realizing that the first
    tree does not have "d"

So contrary to the claim in d8febde370, we really do need to
manually use update_tree_entry(), because advancing the tree
pointer depends on the entry comparison.

That means we must stop using tree_entry() to access each
entry, since it auto-advances the pointer. Instead:

  - we'll use tree_desc.size directly to know if there's
    anything left to look at (which is what tree_entry() was
    doing under the hood)

  - rather than do an extra struct assignment to "e1" and
    "e2", we can just access the "entry" field of tree_desc
    directly

That makes us a little more intimate with the tree_desc
code, but that's not uncommon for its callers.

There's no regression test here, as it's a little tricky to
trigger this with a minimal example. The user-visible effect
is that the heuristics fail to correlate two trees that
should be. But in a minimal example, there aren't a lot of
other trees to match, so we often end up doing the right
thing anyway.

A real-world example (from the original bug report) is:

-- >8 --
git init repo
cd repo

echo init >file
git add file
git commit -m init

git remote add tig https://github.com/jonas/tig.git
git fetch tig
git merge -s ours --no-commit --allow-unrelated-histories tig-2.3.0
git read-tree --prefix=src/ -u tig-2.3.0
git commit -m 'get upstream tig-2.3.0'

echo update >file
git commit -a -m update

git merge -s subtree tig-2.4.0
-- 8< --

Before this patch, we fail to realize that the tig-2.4.0
content should go into the "src" directory.

Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
---
 match-trees.c | 43 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------------
 1 file changed, 26 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)

diff --git a/match-trees.c b/match-trees.c
index 4cdeff53e1..37653308d3 100644
--- a/match-trees.c
+++ b/match-trees.c
@@ -83,34 +83,43 @@ static int score_trees(const struct object_id *hash1, const struct object_id *ha
 	int score = 0;
 
 	for (;;) {
-		struct name_entry e1, e2;
-		int got_entry_from_one = tree_entry(&one, &e1);
-		int got_entry_from_two = tree_entry(&two, &e2);
 		int cmp;
 
-		if (got_entry_from_one && got_entry_from_two)
-			cmp = base_name_entries_compare(&e1, &e2);
-		else if (got_entry_from_one)
+		if (one.size && two.size)
+			cmp = base_name_entries_compare(&one.entry, &two.entry);
+		else if (one.size)
 			/* two lacks this entry */
 			cmp = -1;
-		else if (got_entry_from_two)
+		else if (two.size)
 			/* two has more entries */
 			cmp = 1;
 		else
 			break;
 
-		if (cmp < 0)
+		if (cmp < 0) {
 			/* path1 does not appear in two */
-			score += score_missing(e1.mode, e1.path);
-		else if (cmp > 0)
+			score += score_missing(one.entry.mode, one.entry.path);
+			update_tree_entry(&one);
+		} else if (cmp > 0) {
 			/* path2 does not appear in one */
-			score += score_missing(e2.mode, e2.path);
-		else if (oidcmp(e1.oid, e2.oid))
-			/* they are different */
-			score += score_differs(e1.mode, e2.mode, e1.path);
-		else
-			/* same subtree or blob */
-			score += score_matches(e1.mode, e2.mode, e1.path);
+			score += score_missing(two.entry.mode, two.entry.path);
+			update_tree_entry(&two);
+		} else {
+			/* path appears in both */
+			if (oidcmp(one.entry.oid, two.entry.oid)) {
+				/* they are different */
+				score += score_differs(one.entry.mode,
+						       two.entry.mode,
+						       one.entry.path);
+			} else {
+				/* same subtree or blob */
+				score += score_matches(one.entry.mode,
+						       two.entry.mode,
+						       one.entry.path);
+			}
+			update_tree_entry(&one);
+			update_tree_entry(&two);
+		}
 	}
 	free(one_buf);
 	free(two_buf);
-- 
2.18.0.796.g4bfd63b683


  reply	other threads:[~2018-07-31 19:05 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-07-31 14:09 git merge -s subtree seems to be broken George Shammas
2018-07-31 15:03 ` George Shammas
2018-07-31 15:50   ` Jeff King
2018-07-31 16:08     ` Junio C Hamano
2018-08-01  0:58     ` René Scharfe
2018-07-31 15:53   ` Junio C Hamano
2018-07-31 15:56     ` George Shammas
2018-07-31 16:15     ` Jeff King
2018-07-31 17:17       ` Junio C Hamano
2018-07-31 17:23         ` Jeff King
2018-07-31 19:04           ` Jeff King [this message]
2018-07-31 19:52             ` George Shammas
2018-07-31 20:40               ` Jeff King
2018-07-31 21:06             ` Junio C Hamano
2018-08-01  0:58               ` René Scharfe
2018-08-02 18:58                 ` Jeff King
2018-08-02 18:45               ` Jeff King

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=20180731190459.GA3372@sigill.intra.peff.net \
    --to=peff@peff.net \
    --cc=georgyo@gmail.com \
    --cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=gitster@pobox.com \
    --cc=l.s.r@web.de \
    /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).