git.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
To: Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org,  Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ref-filter: fix stale parsed objects
Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2025 10:31:14 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <xmqqpl9xps3x.fsf@gitster.g> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20251104-b4-pks-ref-filter-fixup-v1-1-2fbca52d76d9@pks.im> (Patrick Steinhardt's message of "Tue, 04 Nov 2025 15:36:13 +0100")

Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im> writes:

> In 054f5f457e (ref-filter: parse objects on demand, 2025-10-23) we have
> started to skip parsing some objects in case we don't need to access
> their values in the first place. This was done by introducing a new
> member `struct expand_data::maybe_object` that gets populated on demand
> via `get_or_parse_object()`.
>
> This has led to a regression though where the object now gets reused
> because we don't reset it properly. The `oi` structure is declared in
> global scope, and there is no single place where we reset it before
> invoking `get_object()`. The consequence is that the `maybe_object`
> member doesn't get reset across calls, so subsequent calls will end up
> reusing the same object.
>
> This is only an issue for a subset of retrieved values, as not all of
> the infrastructure ends up calling `get_or_parse_object()`. So the
> effect is limited, which is probably why the issue wasn't detected
> earlier.
>
> Fix the issue by resetting `maybe_object` in `get_object()`.
>
> Reported-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
> Based-on-patch-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
> Signed-off-by: Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im>
> ---
> As reported by Junio in <xmqqo6pjt2wn.fsf@gitster.g>. This applies
> directly on top of ps/ref-peeled-tags at 054f5f457e (ref-filter: parse
> objects on demand, 2025-10-23)
>
> Thanks!

Thanks.  As we stop reusing a stale maybe_object and instead start
parsing the right object when we need to, I wondered if the "on
demand" commit needs a new benchmark, but the example cited in the
message used %(raw) so it would not be affected, I guess.

Queued.  Thanks.

  parent reply	other threads:[~2025-11-04 18:31 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2025-11-04 14:36 [PATCH] ref-filter: fix stale parsed objects Patrick Steinhardt
2025-11-04 15:26 ` Junio C Hamano
2025-11-04 18:31 ` Junio C Hamano [this message]
2025-11-04 21:11   ` Jeff King
2025-11-04 22:04     ` Jeff King
2025-11-06  6:04   ` Patrick Steinhardt
2025-11-04 21:33 ` 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=xmqqpl9xps3x.fsf@gitster.g \
    --to=gitster@pobox.com \
    --cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=peff@peff.net \
    --cc=ps@pks.im \
    /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).