git.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
To: Johannes Schindelin via GitGitGadget <gitgitgadget@gmail.com>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] t5552: fix flakiness by introducing proper locking for GIT_TRACE
Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2018 15:47:12 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180809194712.GC32376@sigill.intra.peff.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <pull.17.git.gitgitgadget@gmail.com>

On Thu, Aug 09, 2018 at 10:35:24AM -0700, Johannes Schindelin via GitGitGadget wrote:

> The culprit is that two processes try simultaneously to write to the same
> file specified via GIT_TRACE_PACKET, and it is not well defined how that
> should work, even on Linux.

Are you sure that it's not well-defined? We open the path with O_APPEND,
which means every write() will be atomically positioned at the end of
file. So we would never lose or overwrite data.

We do our own buffering in a strbuf, writing the result out in a single
write() call (modulo the OS returning a short write, but that should not
generally happen when writing short strings to a file). So we should get
individual trace lines as atomic units.

The order of lines from the two processes is undefined, of course.

> This patch series addresses that by locking the trace fd. I chose to use 
> flock() instead of fcntl() because the Win32 API LockFileEx()
> [https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/desktop/api/fileapi/nf-fileapi-lockfileex] 
> (which does exactly what I want in this context) has much more similar
> semantics to the former than the latter.

I must admit I'm not excited to see us adding extra locking and
complexity when it is not necessarily needed. Is this a feature we
actually care about delivering for normal users of GIT_TRACE, or do we
just care about solving the test flakiness here?

Because we should be able to do the latter with the patch below.

I also wonder if we should be clearing GIT_TRACE as part of clearing
repo-env. It would do what we want automatically in this case, though
there are definitely cases where I prefer the current behavior (because
I really do want to see the upload-pack side of it). Of course I could
always use "--upload-pack 'GIT_TRACE_PACKET=... upload-pack'", so this
is really just a default.

diff --git a/t/t5552-skipping-fetch-negotiator.sh b/t/t5552-skipping-fetch-negotiator.sh
index 3b60bd44e0..5ad5bece55 100755
--- a/t/t5552-skipping-fetch-negotiator.sh
+++ b/t/t5552-skipping-fetch-negotiator.sh
@@ -28,6 +28,19 @@ have_not_sent () {
 	done
 }
 
+# trace_fetch <client_dir> <server_dir> [args]
+#
+# Trace the packet output of fetch, but make sure we disable the variable
+# in the child upload-pack, so we don't combine the results in the same file.
+trace_fetch () {
+	client=$1; shift
+	server=$1; shift
+	GIT_TRACE_PACKET="$(pwd)/trace" \
+	git -C "$client" fetch \
+	  --upload-pack 'unset GIT_TRACE_PACKET; git-upload-pack' \
+	  "$server" "$@"
+}
+
 test_expect_success 'commits with no parents are sent regardless of skip distance' '
 	git init server &&
 	test_commit -C server to_fetch &&
@@ -42,7 +55,7 @@ test_expect_success 'commits with no parents are sent regardless of skip distanc
 	# "c1" has no parent, it is still sent as "have" even though it would
 	# normally be skipped.
 	test_config -C client fetch.negotiationalgorithm skipping &&
-	GIT_TRACE_PACKET="$(pwd)/trace" git -C client fetch "$(pwd)/server" &&
+	trace_fetch client "$(pwd)/server" &&
 	have_sent c7 c5 c2 c1 &&
 	have_not_sent c6 c4 c3
 '
@@ -88,7 +101,7 @@ test_expect_success 'when two skips collide, favor the larger one' '
 	# the next "have" sent will be "c1" (from "c6" skip 4) and not "c4"
 	# (from "c5side" skip 1).
 	test_config -C client fetch.negotiationalgorithm skipping &&
-	GIT_TRACE_PACKET="$(pwd)/trace" git -C client fetch "$(pwd)/server" &&
+	trace_fetch client "$(pwd)/server" &&
 	have_sent c5side c11 c9 c6 c1 &&
 	have_not_sent c10 c8 c7 c5 c4 c3 c2
 '
@@ -114,7 +127,7 @@ test_expect_success 'use ref advertisement to filter out commits' '
 	# not need to send any ancestors of "c3", but we still need to send "c3"
 	# itself.
 	test_config -C client fetch.negotiationalgorithm skipping &&
-	GIT_TRACE_PACKET="$(pwd)/trace" git -C client fetch origin to_fetch &&
+	trace_fetch client origin to_fetch &&
 	have_sent c5 c4^ c2side &&
 	have_not_sent c4 c4^^ c4^^^
 '
@@ -144,7 +157,7 @@ test_expect_success 'handle clock skew' '
 	# and sent, because (due to clock skew) its only parent has already been
 	# popped off the priority queue.
 	test_config -C client fetch.negotiationalgorithm skipping &&
-	GIT_TRACE_PACKET="$(pwd)/trace" git -C client fetch "$(pwd)/server" &&
+	trace_fetch client "$(pwd)/server" &&
 	have_sent c2 c1 old4 old2 old1 &&
 	have_not_sent old3
 '
@@ -176,7 +189,7 @@ test_expect_success 'do not send "have" with ancestors of commits that server AC
 	test_commit -C server commit-on-b1 &&
 
 	test_config -C client fetch.negotiationalgorithm skipping &&
-	GIT_TRACE_PACKET="$(pwd)/trace" git -C client fetch "$(pwd)/server" to_fetch &&
+	trace_fetch client "$(pwd)/server" to_fetch &&
 	grep "  fetch" trace &&
 
 	# fetch-pack sends 2 requests each containing 16 "have" lines before

  parent reply	other threads:[~2018-08-09 19:47 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 43+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-08-09 17:35 [PATCH 0/4] t5552: fix flakiness by introducing proper locking for GIT_TRACE Johannes Schindelin via GitGitGadget
2018-08-09 17:35 ` [PATCH 1/4] Introduce a function to lock/unlock file descriptors when appending Johannes Schindelin via GitGitGadget
2018-08-09 19:01   ` Junio C Hamano
2018-08-10 18:32     ` Johannes Schindelin
2018-08-09 17:35 ` [PATCH 2/4] mingw: implement lock_or_unlock_fd_for_appending() Johannes Schindelin via GitGitGadget
2018-08-09 17:35 ` [PATCH 3/4] trace: lock the trace file to avoid racy trace_write() calls Johannes Schindelin via GitGitGadget
2018-08-09 17:35 ` [PATCH 4/4] trace: verify that locking works Johannes Schindelin via GitGitGadget
2018-08-09 19:47 ` Jeff King [this message]
2018-08-09 20:49   ` [PATCH 0/4] t5552: fix flakiness by introducing proper locking for GIT_TRACE Junio C Hamano
2018-08-09 21:08     ` Junio C Hamano
2018-08-09 21:32       ` Jeff King
2018-08-10 14:09     ` Jeff King
2018-08-10 15:58       ` Junio C Hamano
2018-08-10 15:58       ` Junio C Hamano
2018-08-10 16:43       ` Johannes Schindelin
2018-08-10 17:15         ` Jeff King
2018-08-10 18:40           ` Junio C Hamano
2018-08-10 19:34           ` Johannes Schindelin
2018-08-10 16:15 ` Johannes Sixt
2018-08-10 16:51   ` Jeff Hostetler
2018-08-10 16:57     ` Jeff Hostetler
2018-08-10 17:08     ` Johannes Sixt
2018-08-10 18:34   ` Junio C Hamano
2018-08-10 18:56     ` Jeff King
2018-08-13 19:02     ` [PATCH] mingw: enable atomic O_APPEND Johannes Sixt
2018-08-13 20:20       ` Junio C Hamano
2018-08-13 21:05         ` Johannes Sixt
2018-08-13 21:22           ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2018-08-13 21:55             ` Junio C Hamano
2018-08-13 22:37             ` Jeff King
2018-08-14 13:47               ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2018-08-14 14:53                 ` Jeff King
2018-08-14 18:29               ` Johannes Sixt
2018-08-14 19:17                 ` Jeff King
2018-08-14 13:01       ` Jeff Hostetler
2018-08-14 14:38         ` Junio C Hamano
2018-08-10 19:47 ` [PATCH v2 0/4] t5552: fix flakiness by introducing proper locking for GIT_TRACE Johannes Schindelin via GitGitGadget
2018-08-10 19:47   ` [PATCH v2 1/4] Introduce a function to lock/unlock file descriptors when appending Johannes Schindelin via GitGitGadget
2018-08-10 20:05     ` Junio C Hamano
2018-08-10 21:31       ` Johannes Schindelin
2018-08-10 19:47   ` [PATCH v2 2/4] mingw: implement lock_or_unlock_fd_for_appending() Johannes Schindelin via GitGitGadget
2018-08-10 19:47   ` [PATCH v2 3/4] trace: lock the trace file to avoid racy trace_write() calls Johannes Schindelin via GitGitGadget
2018-08-10 19:47   ` [PATCH v2 4/4] trace: verify that locking works Johannes Schindelin via GitGitGadget

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=20180809194712.GC32376@sigill.intra.peff.net \
    --to=peff@peff.net \
    --cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=gitgitgadget@gmail.com \
    --cc=gitster@pobox.com \
    /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).