git.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Derrick Stolee <stolee@gmail.com>
To: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Cc: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>,
	Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de>,
	Johannes Schindelin via GitGitGadget <gitgitgadget@gmail.com>,
	git@vger.kernel.org, delphij@google.com,
	Huan Huan Chen <huanhuanchen@google.com>,
	"brian m. carlson" <sandals@crustytoothpaste.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] repository: allow repository format upgrade with extensions
Date: Thu, 16 Jul 2020 08:53:27 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <2d5bc430-f6b3-1b79-a46f-d3d6d6b9fa89@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200716122513.GA1050962@coredump.intra.peff.net>

On 7/16/2020 8:25 AM, Jeff King wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 16, 2020 at 07:00:08AM -0400, Jeff King wrote:
> 
>>>> To avoid mistakes, continue to forbid repository format upgrades in v0
>>>> repositories with an unrecognized extension.  This way, a v0 user
>>>> using a misspelled extension field gets a chance to correct the
>>>> mistake before updating to the less forgiving v1 format.
>>>
>>> This needs to be managed carefully.  When the next extension is
>>> added to the codebase, that extension may be "known" to Git, but I
>>> do not think it is a good idea to honor it in v0 repository, or
>>> allow upgrading v0 repository to v1 with such an extension that
>>> weren't "known" to Git.  For example, a topic in flight adds
>>> objectformat extension and I do not think it should be honored in v0
>>> repository.
>>>
>>> Having said that, the approach is OK for now at the tip of tonight's
>>> master, but the point is "known" vs "unknown" must be fixed right
>>> with some means.  E.g. tell people to throw the "new" extensions to
>>> the list of "unknown extensions" in check_repo_format() when they
>>> add new ones, or something.
>>
>> Yeah, I agree with this line of reasoning. I'd prefer to see it
>> addressed now, so that we don't have to remember to do anything later.
>> I.e., for this patch to put the existing known extensions into the
>> "good" list for v0, locking it into place forever, and leaving the
>> objectformat topic with nothing particular it needs to do.
>>
>> But in the name of -rc1 expediency, I'm also OK moving forward with this
>> for now.
> 
> Hmm, this is actually a bit trickier than I expected because of the way
> the code is written. It's much easier to complain about extensions in a
> v0 repository than it is to ignore them. But I'm not sure if that isn't
> the right way to go anyway.
> 
> The patch I came up with is below (and goes on top of Jonathan's). Even
> if we decide this is the right direction, it can definitely happen
> post-v2.28.
> 
> -- >8 --
> Subject: verify_repository_format(): complain about new extensions in v0 repo
> 
> We made the mistake in the past of respecting extensions.* even when the
> repository format version was set to 0. This is bad because forgetting
> to bump the repository version means that older versions of Git (which
> do not know about our extensions) won't complain. I.e., it's not a
> problem in itself, but it means your repository is in a state which does
> not give you the protection you think you're getting from older
> versions.
> 
> For compatibility reasons, we are stuck with that decision for existing
> extensions. However, we'd prefer not to extend the damage further. We
> can do that by catching any newly-added extensions and complaining about
> the repository format.
> 
> Note that this is a pretty heavy hammer: we'll refuse to work with the
> repository at all. A lesser option would be to ignore (possibly with a
> warning) any new extensions. But because of the way the extensions are
> handled, that puts the burden on each new extension that is added to
> remember to "undo" itself (because they are handled before we know
> for sure whether we are in a v1 repo or not, since we don't insist on a
> particular ordering of config entries).
> 
> So one option would be to rewrite that handling to record any new
> extensions (and their values) during the config parse, and then only
> after proceed to handle new ones only if we're in a v1 repository. But
> I'm not sure if it's worth the trouble:
> 
>   - ignoring extensions is likely to end up with broken results anyway
>     (e.g., ignoring a proposed objectformat extension means parsing any
>     object data is likely to encounter errors)
> 
>   - this is a sign that whatever tool wrote the extension field is
>     broken. We may be better off notifying immediately and forcefully so
>     that such tools don't even appear to work accidentally.
> 
> The only downside is that fixing the istuation is a little tricky,

s/istuation/situation

> because programs like "git config" won't want to work with the
> repository. But:
> 
>   git config --file=.git/config core.repositoryformatversion 1
> 
> should still suffice.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
> ---
>  cache.h                 |  2 +
>  setup.c                 | 96 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------
>  t/t1302-repo-version.sh |  3 ++
>  3 files changed, 85 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/cache.h b/cache.h
> index 654426460c..0290849c19 100644
> --- a/cache.h
> +++ b/cache.h
> @@ -1044,6 +1044,7 @@ struct repository_format {
>  	int hash_algo;
>  	char *work_tree;
>  	struct string_list unknown_extensions;
> +	struct string_list v1_only_extensions;
>  };
>  
>  /*
> @@ -1057,6 +1058,7 @@ struct repository_format {
>  	.is_bare = -1, \
>  	.hash_algo = GIT_HASH_SHA1, \
>  	.unknown_extensions = STRING_LIST_INIT_DUP, \
> +	.v1_only_extensions = STRING_LIST_INIT_DUP, \
>  }
>  
>  /*
> diff --git a/setup.c b/setup.c
> index 3a81307602..c1480b2b60 100644
> --- a/setup.c
> +++ b/setup.c
> @@ -447,6 +447,54 @@ static int read_worktree_config(const char *var, const char *value, void *vdata)
>  	return 0;
>  }
>  
> +enum extension_result {
> +	EXTENSION_ERROR = -1, /* compatible with error(), etc */
> +	EXTENSION_UNKNOWN = 0,
> +	EXTENSION_OK = 1
> +};
> +
> +/*
> + * Do not add new extensions to this function. It handles extensions which are
> + * respected even in v0-format repositories for historical compatibility.
> + */
> +enum extension_result handle_extension_v0(const char *var,
> +					  const char *value,
> +					  const char *ext,
> +					  struct repository_format *data)
...
> +/*
> + * Record any new extensions in this function.
> + */
> +enum extension_result handle_extension(const char *var,
> +				       const char *value,
> +				       const char *ext,
> +				       struct repository_format *data)

I like the split between these two methods to make it
really clear the difference between "v0" and "v1".

>  	struct repository_format *data = vdata;
> @@ -455,23 +503,25 @@ static int check_repo_format(const char *var, const char *value, void *vdata)
>  	if (strcmp(var, "core.repositoryformatversion") == 0)
>  		data->version = git_config_int(var, value);
>  	else if (skip_prefix(var, "extensions.", &ext)) {
...
> +		switch (handle_extension_v0(var, value, ext, data)) {
> +		case EXTENSION_ERROR:
> +			return -1;
> +		case EXTENSION_OK:
> +			return 0;
> +		case EXTENSION_UNKNOWN:
> +			break;
> +		}
> +
> +		switch (handle_extension(var, value, ext, data)) {
> +		case EXTENSION_ERROR:
> +			return -1;
> +		case EXTENSION_OK:
> +			string_list_append(&data->v1_only_extensions, ext);
> +			return 0;
> +		case EXTENSION_UNKNOWN:
>  			string_list_append(&data->unknown_extensions, ext);
> +			return 0;
> +		}
>  	}

And it makes this loop much cleaner.
> @@ -613,6 +665,18 @@ int verify_repository_format(const struct repository_format *format,
>  		return -1;
>  	}
>  
> +	if (format->version == 0 && format->v1_only_extensions.nr) {
> +		int i;
> +
> +		strbuf_addstr(err,
> +			      _("repo version is 0, but v1-only extensions found:"));
> +
> +		for (i = 0; i < format->v1_only_extensions.nr; i++)
> +			strbuf_addf(err, "\n\t%s",
> +				    format->v1_only_extensions.items[i].string);
> +		return -1;
> +	}
> +
>  	return 0;
>  }
>  
> diff --git a/t/t1302-repo-version.sh b/t/t1302-repo-version.sh
> index d60c042ce8..0acabb6d11 100755
> --- a/t/t1302-repo-version.sh
> +++ b/t/t1302-repo-version.sh
> @@ -87,6 +87,9 @@ allow 1
>  allow 1 noop
>  abort 1 no-such-extension
>  allow 0 no-such-extension
> +allow 0 noop
> +abort 0 noop-v1
> +allow 1 noop-v1

LGTM.

Thanks,
-Stolee



  reply	other threads:[~2020-07-16 12:53 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 39+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-07-13 21:55 [PATCH] setup: warn about un-enabled extensions Johannes Schindelin via GitGitGadget
2020-07-13 22:48 ` Junio C Hamano
2020-07-14  0:24 ` Derrick Stolee
2020-07-14 12:21   ` Johannes Schindelin
2020-07-14 15:27     ` Junio C Hamano
2020-07-14 15:40       ` Derrick Stolee
2020-07-14 20:30         ` Johannes Schindelin
2020-07-14 20:47           ` Junio C Hamano
2020-07-15 16:09       ` Junio C Hamano
2020-07-15 17:01         ` Junio C Hamano
2020-07-15 18:00           ` Derrick Stolee
2020-07-15 18:09             ` Junio C Hamano
2020-07-15 18:40               ` Derrick Stolee
2020-07-15 19:16                 ` Johannes Schindelin
2020-07-15 18:15             ` Junio C Hamano
2020-07-15 19:21               ` Johannes Schindelin
2020-07-15 18:20         ` Jonathan Nieder
2020-07-16  2:06           ` Junio C Hamano
2020-07-16  6:20         ` [PATCH 0/2] extensions.* fixes for 2.28 (Re: [PATCH] setup: warn about un-enabled extensions) Jonathan Nieder
2020-07-16  6:24           ` [PATCH 1/2] Revert "check_repository_format_gently(): refuse extensions for old repositories" Jonathan Nieder
2020-07-16 10:56             ` Jeff King
2020-07-16  6:28           ` [PATCH 2/2] repository: allow repository format upgrade with extensions Jonathan Nieder
2020-07-16  7:01             ` Junio C Hamano
2020-07-16 11:00               ` Jeff King
2020-07-16 12:25                 ` Jeff King
2020-07-16 12:53                   ` Derrick Stolee [this message]
2020-07-16 16:32                   ` Junio C Hamano
2020-07-16 16:53                     ` Jeff King
2020-07-16 20:27                     ` Junio C Hamano
2020-07-16 16:49                   ` Junio C Hamano
2020-07-16 16:56                     ` Jeff King
2020-07-16 16:10                 ` Junio C Hamano
2020-07-16 22:37                   ` Jonathan Nieder
2020-07-16 23:50                     ` Junio C Hamano
2020-07-17 15:27                       ` Jeff King
2020-07-17 17:07                         ` Junio C Hamano
2020-07-17 15:22                     ` Jeff King
2020-07-16  8:13           ` [PATCH 0/2] extensions.* fixes for 2.28 (Re: [PATCH] setup: warn about un-enabled extensions) Johannes Schindelin
2020-07-16 12:17             ` Derrick Stolee

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=2d5bc430-f6b3-1b79-a46f-d3d6d6b9fa89@gmail.com \
    --to=stolee@gmail.com \
    --cc=Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de \
    --cc=delphij@google.com \
    --cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=gitgitgadget@gmail.com \
    --cc=gitster@pobox.com \
    --cc=huanhuanchen@google.com \
    --cc=jrnieder@gmail.com \
    --cc=peff@peff.net \
    --cc=sandals@crustytoothpaste.net \
    /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).