git-commit-vandalism/shallow.c

820 lines
22 KiB
C
Raw Normal View History

#include "cache.h"
#include "repository.h"
#include "tempfile.h"
#include "lockfile.h"
#include "object-store.h"
#include "commit.h"
#include "tag.h"
#include "pkt-line.h"
shallow.c: the 8 steps to select new commits for .git/shallow Suppose a fetch or push is requested between two shallow repositories (with no history deepening or shortening). A pack that contains necessary objects is transferred over together with .git/shallow of the sender. The receiver has to determine whether it needs to update .git/shallow if new refs needs new shallow comits. The rule here is avoid updating .git/shallow by default. But we don't want to waste the received pack. If the pack contains two refs, one needs new shallow commits installed in .git/shallow and one does not, we keep the latter and reject/warn about the former. Even if .git/shallow update is allowed, we only add shallow commits strictly necessary for the former ref (remember the sender can send more shallow commits than necessary) and pay attention not to accidentally cut the receiver history short (no history shortening is asked for) So the steps to figure out what ref need what new shallow commits are: 1. Split the sender shallow commit list into "ours" and "theirs" list by has_sha1_file. Those that exist in current repo in "ours", the remaining in "theirs". 2. Check the receiver .git/shallow, remove from "ours" the ones that also exist in .git/shallow. 3. Fetch the new pack. Either install or unpack it. 4. Do has_sha1_file on "theirs" list again. Drop the ones that fail has_sha1_file. Obviously the new pack does not need them. 5. If the pack is kept, remove from "ours" the ones that do not exist in the new pack. 6. Walk the new refs to answer the question "what shallow commits, both ours and theirs, are required in .git/shallow in order to add this ref?". Shallow commits not associated to any refs are removed from their respective list. 7. (*) Check reachability (from the current refs) of all remaining commits in "ours". Those reachable are removed. We do not want to cut any part of our (reachable) history. We only check up commits. True reachability test is done by check_everything_connected() at the end as usual. 8. Combine the final "ours" and "theirs" and add them all to .git/shallow. Install new refs. The case where some hook rejects some refs on a push is explained in more detail in the push patches. Of these steps, #6 and #7 are expensive. Both require walking through some commits, or in the worst case all commits. And we rather avoid them in at least common case, where the transferred pack does not contain any shallow commits that the sender advertises. Let's look at each scenario: 1) the sender has longer history than the receiver All shallow commits from the sender will be put into "theirs" list at step 1 because none of them exists in current repo. In the common case, "theirs" becomes empty at step 4 and exit early. 2) the sender has shorter history than the receiver All shallow commits from the sender are likely in "ours" list at step 1. In the common case, if the new pack is kept, we could empty "ours" and exit early at step 5. If the pack is not kept, we hit the expensive step 6 then exit after "ours" is emptied. There'll be only a handful of objects to walk in fast-forward case. If it's forced update, we may need to walk to the bottom. 3) the sender has same .git/shallow as the receiver This is similar to case 2 except that "ours" should be emptied at step 2 and exit early. A fetch after "clone --depth=X" is case 1. A fetch after "clone" (from a shallow repo) is case 3. Luckily they're cheap for the common case. A push from "clone --depth=X" falls into case 2, which is expensive. Some more work may be done at the sender/client side to avoid more work on the server side: if the transferred pack does not contain any shallow commits, send-pack should not send any shallow commits to the receive-pack, effectively turning it into a normal push and avoid all steps. This patch implements all steps except #3, already handled by fetch-pack and receive-pack, #6 and #7, which has their own patch due to their size. (*) in previous versions step 7 was put before step 3. I reorder it so that the common case that keeps the pack does not need to walk commits at all. In future if we implement faster commit reachability check (maybe with the help of pack bitmaps or commit cache), step 7 could become cheap and be moved up before 6 again. Signed-off-by: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy <pclouds@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2013-12-05 14:02:35 +01:00
#include "remote.h"
#include "refs.h"
#include "oid-array.h"
shallow.c: the 8 steps to select new commits for .git/shallow Suppose a fetch or push is requested between two shallow repositories (with no history deepening or shortening). A pack that contains necessary objects is transferred over together with .git/shallow of the sender. The receiver has to determine whether it needs to update .git/shallow if new refs needs new shallow comits. The rule here is avoid updating .git/shallow by default. But we don't want to waste the received pack. If the pack contains two refs, one needs new shallow commits installed in .git/shallow and one does not, we keep the latter and reject/warn about the former. Even if .git/shallow update is allowed, we only add shallow commits strictly necessary for the former ref (remember the sender can send more shallow commits than necessary) and pay attention not to accidentally cut the receiver history short (no history shortening is asked for) So the steps to figure out what ref need what new shallow commits are: 1. Split the sender shallow commit list into "ours" and "theirs" list by has_sha1_file. Those that exist in current repo in "ours", the remaining in "theirs". 2. Check the receiver .git/shallow, remove from "ours" the ones that also exist in .git/shallow. 3. Fetch the new pack. Either install or unpack it. 4. Do has_sha1_file on "theirs" list again. Drop the ones that fail has_sha1_file. Obviously the new pack does not need them. 5. If the pack is kept, remove from "ours" the ones that do not exist in the new pack. 6. Walk the new refs to answer the question "what shallow commits, both ours and theirs, are required in .git/shallow in order to add this ref?". Shallow commits not associated to any refs are removed from their respective list. 7. (*) Check reachability (from the current refs) of all remaining commits in "ours". Those reachable are removed. We do not want to cut any part of our (reachable) history. We only check up commits. True reachability test is done by check_everything_connected() at the end as usual. 8. Combine the final "ours" and "theirs" and add them all to .git/shallow. Install new refs. The case where some hook rejects some refs on a push is explained in more detail in the push patches. Of these steps, #6 and #7 are expensive. Both require walking through some commits, or in the worst case all commits. And we rather avoid them in at least common case, where the transferred pack does not contain any shallow commits that the sender advertises. Let's look at each scenario: 1) the sender has longer history than the receiver All shallow commits from the sender will be put into "theirs" list at step 1 because none of them exists in current repo. In the common case, "theirs" becomes empty at step 4 and exit early. 2) the sender has shorter history than the receiver All shallow commits from the sender are likely in "ours" list at step 1. In the common case, if the new pack is kept, we could empty "ours" and exit early at step 5. If the pack is not kept, we hit the expensive step 6 then exit after "ours" is emptied. There'll be only a handful of objects to walk in fast-forward case. If it's forced update, we may need to walk to the bottom. 3) the sender has same .git/shallow as the receiver This is similar to case 2 except that "ours" should be emptied at step 2 and exit early. A fetch after "clone --depth=X" is case 1. A fetch after "clone" (from a shallow repo) is case 3. Luckily they're cheap for the common case. A push from "clone --depth=X" falls into case 2, which is expensive. Some more work may be done at the sender/client side to avoid more work on the server side: if the transferred pack does not contain any shallow commits, send-pack should not send any shallow commits to the receive-pack, effectively turning it into a normal push and avoid all steps. This patch implements all steps except #3, already handled by fetch-pack and receive-pack, #6 and #7, which has their own patch due to their size. (*) in previous versions step 7 was put before step 3. I reorder it so that the common case that keeps the pack does not need to walk commits at all. In future if we implement faster commit reachability check (maybe with the help of pack bitmaps or commit cache), step 7 could become cheap and be moved up before 6 again. Signed-off-by: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy <pclouds@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2013-12-05 14:02:35 +01:00
#include "diff.h"
#include "revision.h"
#include "commit-slab.h"
shallow.c: implement a generic shallow boundary finder based on rev-list Instead of a custom commit walker like get_shallow_commits(), this new function uses rev-list to mark NOT_SHALLOW to all reachable commits, except borders. The definition of reachable is to be defined by the protocol later. This makes it more flexible to define shallow boundary. The way we find border is paint all reachable commits NOT_SHALLOW. Any of them that "touches" commits without NOT_SHALLOW flag are considered shallow (e.g. zero parents via grafting mechanism). Shallow commits and their true parents are all marked SHALLOW. Then NOT_SHALLOW is removed from shallow commits at the end. There is an interesting observation. With a generic walker, we can produce all kinds of shallow cutting. In the following graph, every commit but "x" is reachable. "b" is a parent of "a". x -- a -- o / / x -- c -- b -- o After this function is run, "a" and "c" are both considered shallow commits. After grafting occurs at the client side, what we see is a -- o / c -- b -- o Notice that because of grafting, "a" has zero parents, so "b" is no longer a parent of "a". This is unfortunate and may be solved in two ways. The first is change the way shallow grafting works and keep "a -- b" connection if "b" exists and always ends at shallow commits (iow, no loose ends). This is hard to detect, or at least not cheap to do. The second way is mark one "x" as shallow commit instead of "a" and produce this graph at client side: x -- a -- o / / c -- b -- o More commits, but simpler grafting rules. Signed-off-by: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy <pclouds@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-06-12 12:53:57 +02:00
#include "list-objects.h"
#include "commit-reach.h"
#include "shallow.h"
void set_alternate_shallow_file(struct repository *r, const char *path, int override)
{
if (r->parsed_objects->is_shallow != -1)
BUG("is_repository_shallow must not be called before set_alternate_shallow_file");
if (r->parsed_objects->alternate_shallow_file && !override)
return;
free(r->parsed_objects->alternate_shallow_file);
r->parsed_objects->alternate_shallow_file = xstrdup_or_null(path);
}
int register_shallow(struct repository *r, const struct object_id *oid)
{
struct commit_graft *graft =
xmalloc(sizeof(struct commit_graft));
struct commit *commit = lookup_commit(the_repository, oid);
oidcpy(&graft->oid, oid);
graft->nr_parent = -1;
if (commit && commit->object.parsed)
commit->parents = NULL;
return register_commit_graft(r, graft, 0);
}
int unregister_shallow(const struct object_id *oid)
{
int pos = commit_graft_pos(the_repository, oid->hash);
if (pos < 0)
return -1;
if (pos + 1 < the_repository->parsed_objects->grafts_nr)
MOVE_ARRAY(the_repository->parsed_objects->grafts + pos,
the_repository->parsed_objects->grafts + pos + 1,
the_repository->parsed_objects->grafts_nr - pos - 1);
the_repository->parsed_objects->grafts_nr--;
return 0;
}
int is_repository_shallow(struct repository *r)
{
FILE *fp;
char buf[1024];
const char *path = r->parsed_objects->alternate_shallow_file;
if (r->parsed_objects->is_shallow >= 0)
return r->parsed_objects->is_shallow;
if (!path)
path = git_path_shallow(r);
/*
* fetch-pack sets '--shallow-file ""' as an indicator that no
* shallow file should be used. We could just open it and it
* will likely fail. But let's do an explicit check instead.
*/
if (!*path || (fp = fopen(path, "r")) == NULL) {
stat_validity_clear(r->parsed_objects->shallow_stat);
r->parsed_objects->is_shallow = 0;
return r->parsed_objects->is_shallow;
}
stat_validity_update(r->parsed_objects->shallow_stat, fileno(fp));
r->parsed_objects->is_shallow = 1;
while (fgets(buf, sizeof(buf), fp)) {
struct object_id oid;
if (get_oid_hex(buf, &oid))
die("bad shallow line: %s", buf);
register_shallow(r, &oid);
}
fclose(fp);
return r->parsed_objects->is_shallow;
}
shallow.c: use '{commit,rollback}_shallow_file' In bd0b42aed3 (fetch-pack: do not take shallow lock unnecessarily, 2019-01-10), the author noted that 'is_repository_shallow' produces visible side-effect(s) by setting 'is_shallow' and 'shallow_stat'. This is a problem for e.g., fetching with '--update-shallow' in a shallow repository with 'fetch.writeCommitGraph' enabled, since the update to '.git/shallow' will cause Git to think that the repository isn't shallow when it is, thereby circumventing the commit-graph compatibility check. This causes problems in shallow repositories with at least shallow refs that have at least one ancestor (since the client won't have those objects, and therefore can't take the reachability closure over commits when writing a commit-graph). Address this by introducing thin wrappers over 'commit_lock_file' and 'rollback_lock_file' for use specifically when the lock is held over '.git/shallow'. These wrappers (appropriately called 'commit_shallow_file' and 'rollback_shallow_file') call into their respective functions in 'lockfile.h', but additionally reset validity checks used by the shallow machinery. Replace each instance of 'commit_lock_file' and 'rollback_lock_file' with 'commit_shallow_file' and 'rollback_shallow_file' when the lock being held is over the '.git/shallow' file. As a result, 'prune_shallow' can now only be called once (since 'check_shallow_file_for_update' will die after calling 'reset_repository_shallow'). But, this is OK since we only call 'prune_shallow' at most once per process. Helped-by: Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com> Helped-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> Signed-off-by: Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com> Reviewed-by: Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2020-04-23 02:25:45 +02:00
static void reset_repository_shallow(struct repository *r)
{
r->parsed_objects->is_shallow = -1;
stat_validity_clear(r->parsed_objects->shallow_stat);
}
int commit_shallow_file(struct repository *r, struct shallow_lock *lk)
shallow.c: use '{commit,rollback}_shallow_file' In bd0b42aed3 (fetch-pack: do not take shallow lock unnecessarily, 2019-01-10), the author noted that 'is_repository_shallow' produces visible side-effect(s) by setting 'is_shallow' and 'shallow_stat'. This is a problem for e.g., fetching with '--update-shallow' in a shallow repository with 'fetch.writeCommitGraph' enabled, since the update to '.git/shallow' will cause Git to think that the repository isn't shallow when it is, thereby circumventing the commit-graph compatibility check. This causes problems in shallow repositories with at least shallow refs that have at least one ancestor (since the client won't have those objects, and therefore can't take the reachability closure over commits when writing a commit-graph). Address this by introducing thin wrappers over 'commit_lock_file' and 'rollback_lock_file' for use specifically when the lock is held over '.git/shallow'. These wrappers (appropriately called 'commit_shallow_file' and 'rollback_shallow_file') call into their respective functions in 'lockfile.h', but additionally reset validity checks used by the shallow machinery. Replace each instance of 'commit_lock_file' and 'rollback_lock_file' with 'commit_shallow_file' and 'rollback_shallow_file' when the lock being held is over the '.git/shallow' file. As a result, 'prune_shallow' can now only be called once (since 'check_shallow_file_for_update' will die after calling 'reset_repository_shallow'). But, this is OK since we only call 'prune_shallow' at most once per process. Helped-by: Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com> Helped-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> Signed-off-by: Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com> Reviewed-by: Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2020-04-23 02:25:45 +02:00
{
int res = commit_lock_file(&lk->lock);
shallow.c: use '{commit,rollback}_shallow_file' In bd0b42aed3 (fetch-pack: do not take shallow lock unnecessarily, 2019-01-10), the author noted that 'is_repository_shallow' produces visible side-effect(s) by setting 'is_shallow' and 'shallow_stat'. This is a problem for e.g., fetching with '--update-shallow' in a shallow repository with 'fetch.writeCommitGraph' enabled, since the update to '.git/shallow' will cause Git to think that the repository isn't shallow when it is, thereby circumventing the commit-graph compatibility check. This causes problems in shallow repositories with at least shallow refs that have at least one ancestor (since the client won't have those objects, and therefore can't take the reachability closure over commits when writing a commit-graph). Address this by introducing thin wrappers over 'commit_lock_file' and 'rollback_lock_file' for use specifically when the lock is held over '.git/shallow'. These wrappers (appropriately called 'commit_shallow_file' and 'rollback_shallow_file') call into their respective functions in 'lockfile.h', but additionally reset validity checks used by the shallow machinery. Replace each instance of 'commit_lock_file' and 'rollback_lock_file' with 'commit_shallow_file' and 'rollback_shallow_file' when the lock being held is over the '.git/shallow' file. As a result, 'prune_shallow' can now only be called once (since 'check_shallow_file_for_update' will die after calling 'reset_repository_shallow'). But, this is OK since we only call 'prune_shallow' at most once per process. Helped-by: Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com> Helped-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> Signed-off-by: Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com> Reviewed-by: Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2020-04-23 02:25:45 +02:00
reset_repository_shallow(r);
return res;
}
void rollback_shallow_file(struct repository *r, struct shallow_lock *lk)
shallow.c: use '{commit,rollback}_shallow_file' In bd0b42aed3 (fetch-pack: do not take shallow lock unnecessarily, 2019-01-10), the author noted that 'is_repository_shallow' produces visible side-effect(s) by setting 'is_shallow' and 'shallow_stat'. This is a problem for e.g., fetching with '--update-shallow' in a shallow repository with 'fetch.writeCommitGraph' enabled, since the update to '.git/shallow' will cause Git to think that the repository isn't shallow when it is, thereby circumventing the commit-graph compatibility check. This causes problems in shallow repositories with at least shallow refs that have at least one ancestor (since the client won't have those objects, and therefore can't take the reachability closure over commits when writing a commit-graph). Address this by introducing thin wrappers over 'commit_lock_file' and 'rollback_lock_file' for use specifically when the lock is held over '.git/shallow'. These wrappers (appropriately called 'commit_shallow_file' and 'rollback_shallow_file') call into their respective functions in 'lockfile.h', but additionally reset validity checks used by the shallow machinery. Replace each instance of 'commit_lock_file' and 'rollback_lock_file' with 'commit_shallow_file' and 'rollback_shallow_file' when the lock being held is over the '.git/shallow' file. As a result, 'prune_shallow' can now only be called once (since 'check_shallow_file_for_update' will die after calling 'reset_repository_shallow'). But, this is OK since we only call 'prune_shallow' at most once per process. Helped-by: Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com> Helped-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> Signed-off-by: Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com> Reviewed-by: Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2020-04-23 02:25:45 +02:00
{
rollback_lock_file(&lk->lock);
shallow.c: use '{commit,rollback}_shallow_file' In bd0b42aed3 (fetch-pack: do not take shallow lock unnecessarily, 2019-01-10), the author noted that 'is_repository_shallow' produces visible side-effect(s) by setting 'is_shallow' and 'shallow_stat'. This is a problem for e.g., fetching with '--update-shallow' in a shallow repository with 'fetch.writeCommitGraph' enabled, since the update to '.git/shallow' will cause Git to think that the repository isn't shallow when it is, thereby circumventing the commit-graph compatibility check. This causes problems in shallow repositories with at least shallow refs that have at least one ancestor (since the client won't have those objects, and therefore can't take the reachability closure over commits when writing a commit-graph). Address this by introducing thin wrappers over 'commit_lock_file' and 'rollback_lock_file' for use specifically when the lock is held over '.git/shallow'. These wrappers (appropriately called 'commit_shallow_file' and 'rollback_shallow_file') call into their respective functions in 'lockfile.h', but additionally reset validity checks used by the shallow machinery. Replace each instance of 'commit_lock_file' and 'rollback_lock_file' with 'commit_shallow_file' and 'rollback_shallow_file' when the lock being held is over the '.git/shallow' file. As a result, 'prune_shallow' can now only be called once (since 'check_shallow_file_for_update' will die after calling 'reset_repository_shallow'). But, this is OK since we only call 'prune_shallow' at most once per process. Helped-by: Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com> Helped-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> Signed-off-by: Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com> Reviewed-by: Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2020-04-23 02:25:45 +02:00
reset_repository_shallow(r);
}
/*
* TODO: use "int" elemtype instead of "int *" when/if commit-slab
* supports a "valid" flag.
*/
define_commit_slab(commit_depth, int *);
struct commit_list *get_shallow_commits(struct object_array *heads, int depth,
int shallow_flag, int not_shallow_flag)
{
int i = 0, cur_depth = 0;
struct commit_list *result = NULL;
struct object_array stack = OBJECT_ARRAY_INIT;
struct commit *commit = NULL;
struct commit_graft *graft;
struct commit_depth depths;
init_commit_depth(&depths);
while (commit || i < heads->nr || stack.nr) {
struct commit_list *p;
if (!commit) {
if (i < heads->nr) {
int **depth_slot;
commit = (struct commit *)
deref_tag(the_repository,
heads->objects[i++].item,
NULL, 0);
if (!commit || commit->object.type != OBJ_COMMIT) {
commit = NULL;
continue;
}
depth_slot = commit_depth_at(&depths, commit);
if (!*depth_slot)
*depth_slot = xmalloc(sizeof(int));
**depth_slot = 0;
cur_depth = 0;
} else {
commit = (struct commit *)
object_array: add and use `object_array_pop()` In a couple of places, we pop objects off an object array `foo` by decreasing `foo.nr`. We access `foo.nr` in many places, but most if not all other times we do so read-only, e.g., as we iterate over the array. But when we change `foo.nr` behind the array's back, it feels a bit nasty and looks like it might leak memory. Leaks happen if the popped element has an allocated `name` or `path`. At the moment, that is not the case. Still, 1) the object array might gain more fields that want to be freed, 2) a code path where we pop might start using names or paths, 3) one of these code paths might be copied to somewhere where we do, and 4) using a dedicated function for popping is conceptually cleaner. Introduce and use `object_array_pop()` instead. Release memory in the new function. Document that popping an object leaves the associated elements in limbo. The converted places were identified by grepping for "\.nr\>" and looking for "--". Make the new function return NULL on an empty array. This is consistent with `pop_commit()` and allows the following: while ((o = object_array_pop(&foo)) != NULL) { // do something } But as noted above, we don't need to go out of our way to avoid reading `foo.nr`. This is probably more readable: while (foo.nr) { ... o = object_array_pop(&foo); // do something } The name of `object_array_pop()` does not quite align with `add_object_array()`. That is unfortunate. On the other hand, it matches `object_array_clear()`. Arguably it's `add_...` that is the odd one out, since it reads like it's used to "add" an "object array". For that reason, side with `object_array_clear()`. Signed-off-by: Martin Ågren <martin.agren@gmail.com> Reviewed-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2017-09-23 01:34:53 +02:00
object_array_pop(&stack);
cur_depth = **commit_depth_at(&depths, commit);
}
}
parse_commit_or_die(commit);
cur_depth++;
if ((depth != INFINITE_DEPTH && cur_depth >= depth) ||
(is_repository_shallow(the_repository) && !commit->parents &&
(graft = lookup_commit_graft(the_repository, &commit->object.oid)) != NULL &&
graft->nr_parent < 0)) {
commit_list_insert(commit, &result);
commit->object.flags |= shallow_flag;
commit = NULL;
continue;
}
commit->object.flags |= not_shallow_flag;
for (p = commit->parents, commit = NULL; p; p = p->next) {
int **depth_slot = commit_depth_at(&depths, p->item);
if (!*depth_slot) {
*depth_slot = xmalloc(sizeof(int));
**depth_slot = cur_depth;
} else {
if (cur_depth >= **depth_slot)
continue;
**depth_slot = cur_depth;
}
if (p->next)
add_object_array(&p->item->object,
NULL, &stack);
else {
commit = p->item;
cur_depth = **commit_depth_at(&depths, commit);
}
}
}
for (i = 0; i < depths.slab_count; i++) {
int j;
if (!depths.slab[i])
continue;
for (j = 0; j < depths.slab_size; j++)
free(depths.slab[i][j]);
}
clear_commit_depth(&depths);
return result;
}
shallow.c: implement a generic shallow boundary finder based on rev-list Instead of a custom commit walker like get_shallow_commits(), this new function uses rev-list to mark NOT_SHALLOW to all reachable commits, except borders. The definition of reachable is to be defined by the protocol later. This makes it more flexible to define shallow boundary. The way we find border is paint all reachable commits NOT_SHALLOW. Any of them that "touches" commits without NOT_SHALLOW flag are considered shallow (e.g. zero parents via grafting mechanism). Shallow commits and their true parents are all marked SHALLOW. Then NOT_SHALLOW is removed from shallow commits at the end. There is an interesting observation. With a generic walker, we can produce all kinds of shallow cutting. In the following graph, every commit but "x" is reachable. "b" is a parent of "a". x -- a -- o / / x -- c -- b -- o After this function is run, "a" and "c" are both considered shallow commits. After grafting occurs at the client side, what we see is a -- o / c -- b -- o Notice that because of grafting, "a" has zero parents, so "b" is no longer a parent of "a". This is unfortunate and may be solved in two ways. The first is change the way shallow grafting works and keep "a -- b" connection if "b" exists and always ends at shallow commits (iow, no loose ends). This is hard to detect, or at least not cheap to do. The second way is mark one "x" as shallow commit instead of "a" and produce this graph at client side: x -- a -- o / / c -- b -- o More commits, but simpler grafting rules. Signed-off-by: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy <pclouds@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-06-12 12:53:57 +02:00
static void show_commit(struct commit *commit, void *data)
{
commit_list_insert(commit, data);
}
/*
* Given rev-list arguments, run rev-list. All reachable commits
* except border ones are marked with not_shallow_flag. Border commits
* are marked with shallow_flag. The list of border/shallow commits
* are also returned.
*/
struct commit_list *get_shallow_commits_by_rev_list(int ac, const char **av,
int shallow_flag,
int not_shallow_flag)
{
struct commit_list *result = NULL, *p;
struct commit_list *not_shallow_list = NULL;
struct rev_info revs;
int both_flags = shallow_flag | not_shallow_flag;
/*
* SHALLOW (excluded) and NOT_SHALLOW (included) should not be
* set at this point. But better be safe than sorry.
*/
clear_object_flags(both_flags);
is_repository_shallow(the_repository); /* make sure shallows are read */
shallow.c: implement a generic shallow boundary finder based on rev-list Instead of a custom commit walker like get_shallow_commits(), this new function uses rev-list to mark NOT_SHALLOW to all reachable commits, except borders. The definition of reachable is to be defined by the protocol later. This makes it more flexible to define shallow boundary. The way we find border is paint all reachable commits NOT_SHALLOW. Any of them that "touches" commits without NOT_SHALLOW flag are considered shallow (e.g. zero parents via grafting mechanism). Shallow commits and their true parents are all marked SHALLOW. Then NOT_SHALLOW is removed from shallow commits at the end. There is an interesting observation. With a generic walker, we can produce all kinds of shallow cutting. In the following graph, every commit but "x" is reachable. "b" is a parent of "a". x -- a -- o / / x -- c -- b -- o After this function is run, "a" and "c" are both considered shallow commits. After grafting occurs at the client side, what we see is a -- o / c -- b -- o Notice that because of grafting, "a" has zero parents, so "b" is no longer a parent of "a". This is unfortunate and may be solved in two ways. The first is change the way shallow grafting works and keep "a -- b" connection if "b" exists and always ends at shallow commits (iow, no loose ends). This is hard to detect, or at least not cheap to do. The second way is mark one "x" as shallow commit instead of "a" and produce this graph at client side: x -- a -- o / / c -- b -- o More commits, but simpler grafting rules. Signed-off-by: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy <pclouds@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-06-12 12:53:57 +02:00
repo_init_revisions(the_repository, &revs, NULL);
shallow.c: implement a generic shallow boundary finder based on rev-list Instead of a custom commit walker like get_shallow_commits(), this new function uses rev-list to mark NOT_SHALLOW to all reachable commits, except borders. The definition of reachable is to be defined by the protocol later. This makes it more flexible to define shallow boundary. The way we find border is paint all reachable commits NOT_SHALLOW. Any of them that "touches" commits without NOT_SHALLOW flag are considered shallow (e.g. zero parents via grafting mechanism). Shallow commits and their true parents are all marked SHALLOW. Then NOT_SHALLOW is removed from shallow commits at the end. There is an interesting observation. With a generic walker, we can produce all kinds of shallow cutting. In the following graph, every commit but "x" is reachable. "b" is a parent of "a". x -- a -- o / / x -- c -- b -- o After this function is run, "a" and "c" are both considered shallow commits. After grafting occurs at the client side, what we see is a -- o / c -- b -- o Notice that because of grafting, "a" has zero parents, so "b" is no longer a parent of "a". This is unfortunate and may be solved in two ways. The first is change the way shallow grafting works and keep "a -- b" connection if "b" exists and always ends at shallow commits (iow, no loose ends). This is hard to detect, or at least not cheap to do. The second way is mark one "x" as shallow commit instead of "a" and produce this graph at client side: x -- a -- o / / c -- b -- o More commits, but simpler grafting rules. Signed-off-by: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy <pclouds@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-06-12 12:53:57 +02:00
save_commit_buffer = 0;
setup_revisions(ac, av, &revs, NULL);
if (prepare_revision_walk(&revs))
die("revision walk setup failed");
traverse_commit_list(&revs, show_commit, NULL, &not_shallow_list);
upload-pack: reject shallow requests that would return nothing Shallow clones with --shallow-since or --shalow-exclude work by running rev-list to get all reachable commits, then draw a boundary between reachable and unreachable and send "shallow" requests based on that. The code does miss one corner case: if rev-list returns nothing, we'll have no border and we'll send no shallow requests back to the client (i.e. no history cuts). This essentially means a full clone (or a full branch if the client requests just one branch). One example is the oldest commit is older than what is specified by --shallow-since. To avoid this, if rev-list returns nothing, we abort the clone/fetch. The user could adjust their request (e.g. --shallow-since further back in the past) and retry. Another possible option for this case is to fall back to a default depth (like depth 1). But I don't like too much magic that way because we may return something unexpected to the user. If they request "history since 2008" and we return a single depth at 2000, that might break stuff for them. It is better to tell them that something is wrong and let them take the best course of action. Note that we need to die() in get_shallow_commits_by_rev_list() instead of just checking for empty result from its caller deepen_by_rev_list() and handling the error there. The reason is, empty result could be a valid case: if you have commits in year 2013 and you request --shallow-since=year.2000 then you should get a full clone (i.e. empty result). Reported-by: Andreas Krey <a.krey@gmx.de> Signed-off-by: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy <pclouds@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2018-05-26 13:35:18 +02:00
if (!not_shallow_list)
die("no commits selected for shallow requests");
shallow.c: implement a generic shallow boundary finder based on rev-list Instead of a custom commit walker like get_shallow_commits(), this new function uses rev-list to mark NOT_SHALLOW to all reachable commits, except borders. The definition of reachable is to be defined by the protocol later. This makes it more flexible to define shallow boundary. The way we find border is paint all reachable commits NOT_SHALLOW. Any of them that "touches" commits without NOT_SHALLOW flag are considered shallow (e.g. zero parents via grafting mechanism). Shallow commits and their true parents are all marked SHALLOW. Then NOT_SHALLOW is removed from shallow commits at the end. There is an interesting observation. With a generic walker, we can produce all kinds of shallow cutting. In the following graph, every commit but "x" is reachable. "b" is a parent of "a". x -- a -- o / / x -- c -- b -- o After this function is run, "a" and "c" are both considered shallow commits. After grafting occurs at the client side, what we see is a -- o / c -- b -- o Notice that because of grafting, "a" has zero parents, so "b" is no longer a parent of "a". This is unfortunate and may be solved in two ways. The first is change the way shallow grafting works and keep "a -- b" connection if "b" exists and always ends at shallow commits (iow, no loose ends). This is hard to detect, or at least not cheap to do. The second way is mark one "x" as shallow commit instead of "a" and produce this graph at client side: x -- a -- o / / c -- b -- o More commits, but simpler grafting rules. Signed-off-by: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy <pclouds@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2016-06-12 12:53:57 +02:00
/* Mark all reachable commits as NOT_SHALLOW */
for (p = not_shallow_list; p; p = p->next)
p->item->object.flags |= not_shallow_flag;
/*
* mark border commits SHALLOW + NOT_SHALLOW.
* We cannot clear NOT_SHALLOW right now. Imagine border
* commit A is processed first, then commit B, whose parent is
* A, later. If NOT_SHALLOW on A is cleared at step 1, B
* itself is considered border at step 2, which is incorrect.
*/
for (p = not_shallow_list; p; p = p->next) {
struct commit *c = p->item;
struct commit_list *parent;
if (parse_commit(c))
die("unable to parse commit %s",
oid_to_hex(&c->object.oid));
for (parent = c->parents; parent; parent = parent->next)
if (!(parent->item->object.flags & not_shallow_flag)) {
c->object.flags |= shallow_flag;
commit_list_insert(c, &result);
break;
}
}
free_commit_list(not_shallow_list);
/*
* Now we can clean up NOT_SHALLOW on border commits. Having
* both flags set can confuse the caller.
*/
for (p = result; p; p = p->next) {
struct object *o = &p->item->object;
if ((o->flags & both_flags) == both_flags)
o->flags &= ~not_shallow_flag;
}
return result;
}
static void check_shallow_file_for_update(struct repository *r)
{
if (r->parsed_objects->is_shallow == -1)
BUG("shallow must be initialized by now");
if (!stat_validity_check(r->parsed_objects->shallow_stat,
git_path_shallow(r)))
die("shallow file has changed since we read it");
}
#define SEEN_ONLY 1
#define VERBOSE 2
#define QUICK 4
struct write_shallow_data {
struct strbuf *out;
int use_pack_protocol;
int count;
unsigned flags;
};
static int write_one_shallow(const struct commit_graft *graft, void *cb_data)
{
struct write_shallow_data *data = cb_data;
const char *hex = oid_to_hex(&graft->oid);
if (graft->nr_parent != -1)
return 0;
if (data->flags & QUICK) {
if (!has_object_file(&graft->oid))
return 0;
} else if (data->flags & SEEN_ONLY) {
struct commit *c = lookup_commit(the_repository, &graft->oid);
if (!c || !(c->object.flags & SEEN)) {
if (data->flags & VERBOSE)
printf("Removing %s from .git/shallow\n",
oid_to_hex(&c->object.oid));
return 0;
}
}
data->count++;
if (data->use_pack_protocol)
packet_buf_write(data->out, "shallow %s", hex);
else {
strbuf_addstr(data->out, hex);
strbuf_addch(data->out, '\n');
}
return 0;
}
static int write_shallow_commits_1(struct strbuf *out, int use_pack_protocol,
const struct oid_array *extra,
unsigned flags)
{
struct write_shallow_data data;
int i;
data.out = out;
data.use_pack_protocol = use_pack_protocol;
data.count = 0;
data.flags = flags;
for_each_commit_graft(write_one_shallow, &data);
if (!extra)
return data.count;
for (i = 0; i < extra->nr; i++) {
strbuf_addstr(out, oid_to_hex(extra->oid + i));
strbuf_addch(out, '\n');
data.count++;
}
return data.count;
}
int write_shallow_commits(struct strbuf *out, int use_pack_protocol,
const struct oid_array *extra)
{
return write_shallow_commits_1(out, use_pack_protocol, extra, 0);
}
const char *setup_temporary_shallow(const struct oid_array *extra)
{
tempfile: auto-allocate tempfiles on heap The previous commit taught the tempfile code to give up ownership over tempfiles that have been renamed or deleted. That makes it possible to use a stack variable like this: struct tempfile t; create_tempfile(&t, ...); ... if (!err) rename_tempfile(&t, ...); else delete_tempfile(&t); But doing it this way has a high potential for creating memory errors. The tempfile we pass to create_tempfile() ends up on a global linked list, and it's not safe for it to go out of scope until we've called one of those two deactivation functions. Imagine that we add an early return from the function that forgets to call delete_tempfile(). With a static or heap tempfile variable, the worst case is that the tempfile hangs around until the program exits (and some functions like setup_shallow_temporary rely on this intentionally, creating a tempfile and then leaving it for later cleanup). But with a stack variable as above, this is a serious memory error: the variable goes out of scope and may be filled with garbage by the time the tempfile code looks at it. Let's see if we can make it harder to get this wrong. Since many callers need to allocate arbitrary numbers of tempfiles, we can't rely on static storage as a general solution. So we need to turn to the heap. We could just ask all callers to pass us a heap variable, but that puts the burden on them to call free() at the right time. Instead, let's have the tempfile code handle the heap allocation _and_ the deallocation (when the tempfile is deactivated and removed from the list). This changes the return value of all of the creation functions. For the cleanup functions (delete and rename), we'll add one extra bit of safety: instead of taking a tempfile pointer, we'll take a pointer-to-pointer and set it to NULL after freeing the object. This makes it safe to double-call functions like delete_tempfile(), as the second call treats the NULL input as a noop. Several callsites follow this pattern. The resulting patch does have a fair bit of noise, as each caller needs to be converted to handle: 1. Storing a pointer instead of the struct itself. 2. Passing the pointer instead of taking the struct address. 3. Handling a "struct tempfile *" return instead of a file descriptor. We could play games to make this less noisy. For example, by defining the tempfile like this: struct tempfile { struct heap_allocated_part_of_tempfile { int fd; ...etc } *actual_data; } Callers would continue to have a "struct tempfile", and it would be "active" only when the inner pointer was non-NULL. But that just makes things more awkward in the long run. There aren't that many callers, so we can simply bite the bullet and adjust all of them. And the compiler makes it easy for us to find them all. Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2017-09-05 14:15:08 +02:00
struct tempfile *temp;
struct strbuf sb = STRBUF_INIT;
if (write_shallow_commits(&sb, 0, extra)) {
tempfile: auto-allocate tempfiles on heap The previous commit taught the tempfile code to give up ownership over tempfiles that have been renamed or deleted. That makes it possible to use a stack variable like this: struct tempfile t; create_tempfile(&t, ...); ... if (!err) rename_tempfile(&t, ...); else delete_tempfile(&t); But doing it this way has a high potential for creating memory errors. The tempfile we pass to create_tempfile() ends up on a global linked list, and it's not safe for it to go out of scope until we've called one of those two deactivation functions. Imagine that we add an early return from the function that forgets to call delete_tempfile(). With a static or heap tempfile variable, the worst case is that the tempfile hangs around until the program exits (and some functions like setup_shallow_temporary rely on this intentionally, creating a tempfile and then leaving it for later cleanup). But with a stack variable as above, this is a serious memory error: the variable goes out of scope and may be filled with garbage by the time the tempfile code looks at it. Let's see if we can make it harder to get this wrong. Since many callers need to allocate arbitrary numbers of tempfiles, we can't rely on static storage as a general solution. So we need to turn to the heap. We could just ask all callers to pass us a heap variable, but that puts the burden on them to call free() at the right time. Instead, let's have the tempfile code handle the heap allocation _and_ the deallocation (when the tempfile is deactivated and removed from the list). This changes the return value of all of the creation functions. For the cleanup functions (delete and rename), we'll add one extra bit of safety: instead of taking a tempfile pointer, we'll take a pointer-to-pointer and set it to NULL after freeing the object. This makes it safe to double-call functions like delete_tempfile(), as the second call treats the NULL input as a noop. Several callsites follow this pattern. The resulting patch does have a fair bit of noise, as each caller needs to be converted to handle: 1. Storing a pointer instead of the struct itself. 2. Passing the pointer instead of taking the struct address. 3. Handling a "struct tempfile *" return instead of a file descriptor. We could play games to make this less noisy. For example, by defining the tempfile like this: struct tempfile { struct heap_allocated_part_of_tempfile { int fd; ...etc } *actual_data; } Callers would continue to have a "struct tempfile", and it would be "active" only when the inner pointer was non-NULL. But that just makes things more awkward in the long run. There aren't that many callers, so we can simply bite the bullet and adjust all of them. And the compiler makes it easy for us to find them all. Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2017-09-05 14:15:08 +02:00
temp = xmks_tempfile(git_path("shallow_XXXXXX"));
if (write_in_full(temp->fd, sb.buf, sb.len) < 0 ||
tempfile: auto-allocate tempfiles on heap The previous commit taught the tempfile code to give up ownership over tempfiles that have been renamed or deleted. That makes it possible to use a stack variable like this: struct tempfile t; create_tempfile(&t, ...); ... if (!err) rename_tempfile(&t, ...); else delete_tempfile(&t); But doing it this way has a high potential for creating memory errors. The tempfile we pass to create_tempfile() ends up on a global linked list, and it's not safe for it to go out of scope until we've called one of those two deactivation functions. Imagine that we add an early return from the function that forgets to call delete_tempfile(). With a static or heap tempfile variable, the worst case is that the tempfile hangs around until the program exits (and some functions like setup_shallow_temporary rely on this intentionally, creating a tempfile and then leaving it for later cleanup). But with a stack variable as above, this is a serious memory error: the variable goes out of scope and may be filled with garbage by the time the tempfile code looks at it. Let's see if we can make it harder to get this wrong. Since many callers need to allocate arbitrary numbers of tempfiles, we can't rely on static storage as a general solution. So we need to turn to the heap. We could just ask all callers to pass us a heap variable, but that puts the burden on them to call free() at the right time. Instead, let's have the tempfile code handle the heap allocation _and_ the deallocation (when the tempfile is deactivated and removed from the list). This changes the return value of all of the creation functions. For the cleanup functions (delete and rename), we'll add one extra bit of safety: instead of taking a tempfile pointer, we'll take a pointer-to-pointer and set it to NULL after freeing the object. This makes it safe to double-call functions like delete_tempfile(), as the second call treats the NULL input as a noop. Several callsites follow this pattern. The resulting patch does have a fair bit of noise, as each caller needs to be converted to handle: 1. Storing a pointer instead of the struct itself. 2. Passing the pointer instead of taking the struct address. 3. Handling a "struct tempfile *" return instead of a file descriptor. We could play games to make this less noisy. For example, by defining the tempfile like this: struct tempfile { struct heap_allocated_part_of_tempfile { int fd; ...etc } *actual_data; } Callers would continue to have a "struct tempfile", and it would be "active" only when the inner pointer was non-NULL. But that just makes things more awkward in the long run. There aren't that many callers, so we can simply bite the bullet and adjust all of them. And the compiler makes it easy for us to find them all. Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2017-09-05 14:15:08 +02:00
close_tempfile_gently(temp) < 0)
die_errno("failed to write to %s",
tempfile: auto-allocate tempfiles on heap The previous commit taught the tempfile code to give up ownership over tempfiles that have been renamed or deleted. That makes it possible to use a stack variable like this: struct tempfile t; create_tempfile(&t, ...); ... if (!err) rename_tempfile(&t, ...); else delete_tempfile(&t); But doing it this way has a high potential for creating memory errors. The tempfile we pass to create_tempfile() ends up on a global linked list, and it's not safe for it to go out of scope until we've called one of those two deactivation functions. Imagine that we add an early return from the function that forgets to call delete_tempfile(). With a static or heap tempfile variable, the worst case is that the tempfile hangs around until the program exits (and some functions like setup_shallow_temporary rely on this intentionally, creating a tempfile and then leaving it for later cleanup). But with a stack variable as above, this is a serious memory error: the variable goes out of scope and may be filled with garbage by the time the tempfile code looks at it. Let's see if we can make it harder to get this wrong. Since many callers need to allocate arbitrary numbers of tempfiles, we can't rely on static storage as a general solution. So we need to turn to the heap. We could just ask all callers to pass us a heap variable, but that puts the burden on them to call free() at the right time. Instead, let's have the tempfile code handle the heap allocation _and_ the deallocation (when the tempfile is deactivated and removed from the list). This changes the return value of all of the creation functions. For the cleanup functions (delete and rename), we'll add one extra bit of safety: instead of taking a tempfile pointer, we'll take a pointer-to-pointer and set it to NULL after freeing the object. This makes it safe to double-call functions like delete_tempfile(), as the second call treats the NULL input as a noop. Several callsites follow this pattern. The resulting patch does have a fair bit of noise, as each caller needs to be converted to handle: 1. Storing a pointer instead of the struct itself. 2. Passing the pointer instead of taking the struct address. 3. Handling a "struct tempfile *" return instead of a file descriptor. We could play games to make this less noisy. For example, by defining the tempfile like this: struct tempfile { struct heap_allocated_part_of_tempfile { int fd; ...etc } *actual_data; } Callers would continue to have a "struct tempfile", and it would be "active" only when the inner pointer was non-NULL. But that just makes things more awkward in the long run. There aren't that many callers, so we can simply bite the bullet and adjust all of them. And the compiler makes it easy for us to find them all. Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2017-09-05 14:15:08 +02:00
get_tempfile_path(temp));
strbuf_release(&sb);
tempfile: auto-allocate tempfiles on heap The previous commit taught the tempfile code to give up ownership over tempfiles that have been renamed or deleted. That makes it possible to use a stack variable like this: struct tempfile t; create_tempfile(&t, ...); ... if (!err) rename_tempfile(&t, ...); else delete_tempfile(&t); But doing it this way has a high potential for creating memory errors. The tempfile we pass to create_tempfile() ends up on a global linked list, and it's not safe for it to go out of scope until we've called one of those two deactivation functions. Imagine that we add an early return from the function that forgets to call delete_tempfile(). With a static or heap tempfile variable, the worst case is that the tempfile hangs around until the program exits (and some functions like setup_shallow_temporary rely on this intentionally, creating a tempfile and then leaving it for later cleanup). But with a stack variable as above, this is a serious memory error: the variable goes out of scope and may be filled with garbage by the time the tempfile code looks at it. Let's see if we can make it harder to get this wrong. Since many callers need to allocate arbitrary numbers of tempfiles, we can't rely on static storage as a general solution. So we need to turn to the heap. We could just ask all callers to pass us a heap variable, but that puts the burden on them to call free() at the right time. Instead, let's have the tempfile code handle the heap allocation _and_ the deallocation (when the tempfile is deactivated and removed from the list). This changes the return value of all of the creation functions. For the cleanup functions (delete and rename), we'll add one extra bit of safety: instead of taking a tempfile pointer, we'll take a pointer-to-pointer and set it to NULL after freeing the object. This makes it safe to double-call functions like delete_tempfile(), as the second call treats the NULL input as a noop. Several callsites follow this pattern. The resulting patch does have a fair bit of noise, as each caller needs to be converted to handle: 1. Storing a pointer instead of the struct itself. 2. Passing the pointer instead of taking the struct address. 3. Handling a "struct tempfile *" return instead of a file descriptor. We could play games to make this less noisy. For example, by defining the tempfile like this: struct tempfile { struct heap_allocated_part_of_tempfile { int fd; ...etc } *actual_data; } Callers would continue to have a "struct tempfile", and it would be "active" only when the inner pointer was non-NULL. But that just makes things more awkward in the long run. There aren't that many callers, so we can simply bite the bullet and adjust all of them. And the compiler makes it easy for us to find them all. Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2017-09-05 14:15:08 +02:00
return get_tempfile_path(temp);
}
/*
* is_repository_shallow() sees empty string as "no shallow
* file".
*/
setup_temporary_shallow: avoid using inactive tempfile When there are no shallow entries to write, we skip creating the tempfile entirely and try to return the empty string. But we do so by calling get_tempfile_path() on the inactive tempfile object. This will trigger an assertion that kills the program. The bug was introduced by 6e122b449b (setup_temporary_shallow(): use tempfile module, 2015-08-10). But nobody seems to have noticed since then because we do not end up calling this function at all when there are no shallow items. In other words, this code path is completely unexercised. Since the tempfile object is a static global, it _is_ possible that we call the function twice, writing out shallow info the first time and then "reusing" our tempfile object the second time. But: 1. It seems unlikely that this was the intent, as hitting this code path would imply somebody clearing the shallow_info list between calls. And if somebody _did_ call the function multiple times without clearing the shallow_info list, we'd hit a different BUG for trying to reuse an already-active tempfile. 2. I verified by code inspection that the function is only called once per program. And also replacing this code with a BUG() and running the test suite demonstrates that it is not triggered there. So we could probably just replace this with an assertion and confirm that it's never called. However, the original intent does seem to be that you _could_ call it when the shallow_info is empty. And that's easy enough to do; since the return value doesn't need to point to a writable buffer, we can just return a string literal. Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2017-09-05 14:14:16 +02:00
return "";
}
void setup_alternate_shallow(struct shallow_lock *shallow_lock,
const char **alternate_shallow_file,
const struct oid_array *extra)
{
struct strbuf sb = STRBUF_INIT;
int fd;
fd = hold_lock_file_for_update(&shallow_lock->lock,
git_path_shallow(the_repository),
LOCK_DIE_ON_ERROR);
check_shallow_file_for_update(the_repository);
if (write_shallow_commits(&sb, 0, extra)) {
avoid "write_in_full(fd, buf, len) != len" pattern The return value of write_in_full() is either "-1", or the requested number of bytes[1]. If we make a partial write before seeing an error, we still return -1, not a partial value. This goes back to f6aa66cb95 (write_in_full: really write in full or return error on disk full., 2007-01-11). So checking anything except "was the return value negative" is pointless. And there are a couple of reasons not to do so: 1. It can do a funny signed/unsigned comparison. If your "len" is signed (e.g., a size_t) then the compiler will promote the "-1" to its unsigned variant. This works out for "!= len" (unless you really were trying to write the maximum size_t bytes), but is a bug if you check "< len" (an example of which was fixed recently in config.c). We should avoid promoting the mental model that you need to check the length at all, so that new sites are not tempted to copy us. 2. Checking for a negative value is shorter to type, especially when the length is an expression. 3. Linus says so. In d34cf19b89 (Clean up write_in_full() users, 2007-01-11), right after the write_in_full() semantics were changed, he wrote: I really wish every "write_in_full()" user would just check against "<0" now, but this fixes the nasty and stupid ones. Appeals to authority aside, this makes it clear that writing it this way does not have an intentional benefit. It's a historical curiosity that we never bothered to clean up (and which was undoubtedly cargo-culted into new sites). So let's convert these obviously-correct cases (this includes write_str_in_full(), which is just a wrapper for write_in_full()). [1] A careful reader may notice there is one way that write_in_full() can return a different value. If we ask write() to write N bytes and get a return value that is _larger_ than N, we could return a larger total. But besides the fact that this would imply a totally broken version of write(), it would already invoke undefined behavior. Our internal remaining counter is an unsigned size_t, which means that subtracting too many byte will wrap it around to a very large number. So we'll instantly begin reading off the end of the buffer, trying to write gigabytes (or petabytes) of data. Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net> Reviewed-by: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2017-09-13 19:16:03 +02:00
if (write_in_full(fd, sb.buf, sb.len) < 0)
die_errno("failed to write to %s",
get_lock_file_path(&shallow_lock->lock));
*alternate_shallow_file = get_lock_file_path(&shallow_lock->lock);
} else
/*
* is_repository_shallow() sees empty string as "no
* shallow file".
*/
*alternate_shallow_file = "";
strbuf_release(&sb);
}
make the sender advertise shallow commits to the receiver If either receive-pack or upload-pack is called on a shallow repository, shallow commits (*) will be sent after the ref advertisement (but before the packet flush), so that the receiver has the full "shape" of the sender's commit graph. This will be needed for the receiver to update its .git/shallow if necessary. This breaks the protocol for all clients trying to push to a shallow repo, or fetch from one. Which is basically the same end result as today's "is_repository_shallow() && die()" in receive-pack and upload-pack. New clients will be made aware of shallow upstream and can make use of this information. The sender must send all shallow commits that are sent in the following pack. It may send more shallow commits than necessary. upload-pack for example may choose to advertise no shallow commits if it knows in advance that the pack it's going to send contains no shallow commits. But upload-pack is the server, so we choose the cheaper way, send full .git/shallow and let the client deal with it. Smart HTTP is not affected by this patch. Shallow support on smart-http comes later separately. (*) A shallow commit is a commit that terminates the revision walker. It is usually put in .git/shallow in order to keep the revision walker from going out of bound because there is no guarantee that objects behind this commit is available. Signed-off-by: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy <pclouds@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2013-12-05 14:02:32 +01:00
static int advertise_shallow_grafts_cb(const struct commit_graft *graft, void *cb)
{
int fd = *(int *)cb;
if (graft->nr_parent == -1)
packet_write_fmt(fd, "shallow %s\n", oid_to_hex(&graft->oid));
make the sender advertise shallow commits to the receiver If either receive-pack or upload-pack is called on a shallow repository, shallow commits (*) will be sent after the ref advertisement (but before the packet flush), so that the receiver has the full "shape" of the sender's commit graph. This will be needed for the receiver to update its .git/shallow if necessary. This breaks the protocol for all clients trying to push to a shallow repo, or fetch from one. Which is basically the same end result as today's "is_repository_shallow() && die()" in receive-pack and upload-pack. New clients will be made aware of shallow upstream and can make use of this information. The sender must send all shallow commits that are sent in the following pack. It may send more shallow commits than necessary. upload-pack for example may choose to advertise no shallow commits if it knows in advance that the pack it's going to send contains no shallow commits. But upload-pack is the server, so we choose the cheaper way, send full .git/shallow and let the client deal with it. Smart HTTP is not affected by this patch. Shallow support on smart-http comes later separately. (*) A shallow commit is a commit that terminates the revision walker. It is usually put in .git/shallow in order to keep the revision walker from going out of bound because there is no guarantee that objects behind this commit is available. Signed-off-by: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy <pclouds@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2013-12-05 14:02:32 +01:00
return 0;
}
void advertise_shallow_grafts(int fd)
{
if (!is_repository_shallow(the_repository))
make the sender advertise shallow commits to the receiver If either receive-pack or upload-pack is called on a shallow repository, shallow commits (*) will be sent after the ref advertisement (but before the packet flush), so that the receiver has the full "shape" of the sender's commit graph. This will be needed for the receiver to update its .git/shallow if necessary. This breaks the protocol for all clients trying to push to a shallow repo, or fetch from one. Which is basically the same end result as today's "is_repository_shallow() && die()" in receive-pack and upload-pack. New clients will be made aware of shallow upstream and can make use of this information. The sender must send all shallow commits that are sent in the following pack. It may send more shallow commits than necessary. upload-pack for example may choose to advertise no shallow commits if it knows in advance that the pack it's going to send contains no shallow commits. But upload-pack is the server, so we choose the cheaper way, send full .git/shallow and let the client deal with it. Smart HTTP is not affected by this patch. Shallow support on smart-http comes later separately. (*) A shallow commit is a commit that terminates the revision walker. It is usually put in .git/shallow in order to keep the revision walker from going out of bound because there is no guarantee that objects behind this commit is available. Signed-off-by: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy <pclouds@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2013-12-05 14:02:32 +01:00
return;
for_each_commit_graft(advertise_shallow_grafts_cb, &fd);
}
shallow.c: the 8 steps to select new commits for .git/shallow Suppose a fetch or push is requested between two shallow repositories (with no history deepening or shortening). A pack that contains necessary objects is transferred over together with .git/shallow of the sender. The receiver has to determine whether it needs to update .git/shallow if new refs needs new shallow comits. The rule here is avoid updating .git/shallow by default. But we don't want to waste the received pack. If the pack contains two refs, one needs new shallow commits installed in .git/shallow and one does not, we keep the latter and reject/warn about the former. Even if .git/shallow update is allowed, we only add shallow commits strictly necessary for the former ref (remember the sender can send more shallow commits than necessary) and pay attention not to accidentally cut the receiver history short (no history shortening is asked for) So the steps to figure out what ref need what new shallow commits are: 1. Split the sender shallow commit list into "ours" and "theirs" list by has_sha1_file. Those that exist in current repo in "ours", the remaining in "theirs". 2. Check the receiver .git/shallow, remove from "ours" the ones that also exist in .git/shallow. 3. Fetch the new pack. Either install or unpack it. 4. Do has_sha1_file on "theirs" list again. Drop the ones that fail has_sha1_file. Obviously the new pack does not need them. 5. If the pack is kept, remove from "ours" the ones that do not exist in the new pack. 6. Walk the new refs to answer the question "what shallow commits, both ours and theirs, are required in .git/shallow in order to add this ref?". Shallow commits not associated to any refs are removed from their respective list. 7. (*) Check reachability (from the current refs) of all remaining commits in "ours". Those reachable are removed. We do not want to cut any part of our (reachable) history. We only check up commits. True reachability test is done by check_everything_connected() at the end as usual. 8. Combine the final "ours" and "theirs" and add them all to .git/shallow. Install new refs. The case where some hook rejects some refs on a push is explained in more detail in the push patches. Of these steps, #6 and #7 are expensive. Both require walking through some commits, or in the worst case all commits. And we rather avoid them in at least common case, where the transferred pack does not contain any shallow commits that the sender advertises. Let's look at each scenario: 1) the sender has longer history than the receiver All shallow commits from the sender will be put into "theirs" list at step 1 because none of them exists in current repo. In the common case, "theirs" becomes empty at step 4 and exit early. 2) the sender has shorter history than the receiver All shallow commits from the sender are likely in "ours" list at step 1. In the common case, if the new pack is kept, we could empty "ours" and exit early at step 5. If the pack is not kept, we hit the expensive step 6 then exit after "ours" is emptied. There'll be only a handful of objects to walk in fast-forward case. If it's forced update, we may need to walk to the bottom. 3) the sender has same .git/shallow as the receiver This is similar to case 2 except that "ours" should be emptied at step 2 and exit early. A fetch after "clone --depth=X" is case 1. A fetch after "clone" (from a shallow repo) is case 3. Luckily they're cheap for the common case. A push from "clone --depth=X" falls into case 2, which is expensive. Some more work may be done at the sender/client side to avoid more work on the server side: if the transferred pack does not contain any shallow commits, send-pack should not send any shallow commits to the receive-pack, effectively turning it into a normal push and avoid all steps. This patch implements all steps except #3, already handled by fetch-pack and receive-pack, #6 and #7, which has their own patch due to their size. (*) in previous versions step 7 was put before step 3. I reorder it so that the common case that keeps the pack does not need to walk commits at all. In future if we implement faster commit reachability check (maybe with the help of pack bitmaps or commit cache), step 7 could become cheap and be moved up before 6 again. Signed-off-by: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy <pclouds@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2013-12-05 14:02:35 +01:00
/*
* mark_reachable_objects() should have been run prior to this and all
* reachable commits marked as "SEEN", except when quick_prune is non-zero,
* in which case lines are excised from the shallow file if they refer to
* commits that do not exist (any longer).
*/
void prune_shallow(unsigned options)
{
struct shallow_lock shallow_lock = SHALLOW_LOCK_INIT;
struct strbuf sb = STRBUF_INIT;
unsigned flags = SEEN_ONLY;
int fd;
if (options & PRUNE_QUICK)
flags |= QUICK;
if (options & PRUNE_SHOW_ONLY) {
flags |= VERBOSE;
write_shallow_commits_1(&sb, 0, NULL, flags);
strbuf_release(&sb);
return;
}
fd = hold_lock_file_for_update(&shallow_lock.lock,
git_path_shallow(the_repository),
LOCK_DIE_ON_ERROR);
check_shallow_file_for_update(the_repository);
if (write_shallow_commits_1(&sb, 0, NULL, flags)) {
avoid "write_in_full(fd, buf, len) != len" pattern The return value of write_in_full() is either "-1", or the requested number of bytes[1]. If we make a partial write before seeing an error, we still return -1, not a partial value. This goes back to f6aa66cb95 (write_in_full: really write in full or return error on disk full., 2007-01-11). So checking anything except "was the return value negative" is pointless. And there are a couple of reasons not to do so: 1. It can do a funny signed/unsigned comparison. If your "len" is signed (e.g., a size_t) then the compiler will promote the "-1" to its unsigned variant. This works out for "!= len" (unless you really were trying to write the maximum size_t bytes), but is a bug if you check "< len" (an example of which was fixed recently in config.c). We should avoid promoting the mental model that you need to check the length at all, so that new sites are not tempted to copy us. 2. Checking for a negative value is shorter to type, especially when the length is an expression. 3. Linus says so. In d34cf19b89 (Clean up write_in_full() users, 2007-01-11), right after the write_in_full() semantics were changed, he wrote: I really wish every "write_in_full()" user would just check against "<0" now, but this fixes the nasty and stupid ones. Appeals to authority aside, this makes it clear that writing it this way does not have an intentional benefit. It's a historical curiosity that we never bothered to clean up (and which was undoubtedly cargo-culted into new sites). So let's convert these obviously-correct cases (this includes write_str_in_full(), which is just a wrapper for write_in_full()). [1] A careful reader may notice there is one way that write_in_full() can return a different value. If we ask write() to write N bytes and get a return value that is _larger_ than N, we could return a larger total. But besides the fact that this would imply a totally broken version of write(), it would already invoke undefined behavior. Our internal remaining counter is an unsigned size_t, which means that subtracting too many byte will wrap it around to a very large number. So we'll instantly begin reading off the end of the buffer, trying to write gigabytes (or petabytes) of data. Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net> Reviewed-by: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2017-09-13 19:16:03 +02:00
if (write_in_full(fd, sb.buf, sb.len) < 0)
die_errno("failed to write to %s",
get_lock_file_path(&shallow_lock.lock));
shallow.c: use '{commit,rollback}_shallow_file' In bd0b42aed3 (fetch-pack: do not take shallow lock unnecessarily, 2019-01-10), the author noted that 'is_repository_shallow' produces visible side-effect(s) by setting 'is_shallow' and 'shallow_stat'. This is a problem for e.g., fetching with '--update-shallow' in a shallow repository with 'fetch.writeCommitGraph' enabled, since the update to '.git/shallow' will cause Git to think that the repository isn't shallow when it is, thereby circumventing the commit-graph compatibility check. This causes problems in shallow repositories with at least shallow refs that have at least one ancestor (since the client won't have those objects, and therefore can't take the reachability closure over commits when writing a commit-graph). Address this by introducing thin wrappers over 'commit_lock_file' and 'rollback_lock_file' for use specifically when the lock is held over '.git/shallow'. These wrappers (appropriately called 'commit_shallow_file' and 'rollback_shallow_file') call into their respective functions in 'lockfile.h', but additionally reset validity checks used by the shallow machinery. Replace each instance of 'commit_lock_file' and 'rollback_lock_file' with 'commit_shallow_file' and 'rollback_shallow_file' when the lock being held is over the '.git/shallow' file. As a result, 'prune_shallow' can now only be called once (since 'check_shallow_file_for_update' will die after calling 'reset_repository_shallow'). But, this is OK since we only call 'prune_shallow' at most once per process. Helped-by: Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com> Helped-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> Signed-off-by: Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com> Reviewed-by: Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2020-04-23 02:25:45 +02:00
commit_shallow_file(the_repository, &shallow_lock);
} else {
unlink(git_path_shallow(the_repository));
shallow.c: use '{commit,rollback}_shallow_file' In bd0b42aed3 (fetch-pack: do not take shallow lock unnecessarily, 2019-01-10), the author noted that 'is_repository_shallow' produces visible side-effect(s) by setting 'is_shallow' and 'shallow_stat'. This is a problem for e.g., fetching with '--update-shallow' in a shallow repository with 'fetch.writeCommitGraph' enabled, since the update to '.git/shallow' will cause Git to think that the repository isn't shallow when it is, thereby circumventing the commit-graph compatibility check. This causes problems in shallow repositories with at least shallow refs that have at least one ancestor (since the client won't have those objects, and therefore can't take the reachability closure over commits when writing a commit-graph). Address this by introducing thin wrappers over 'commit_lock_file' and 'rollback_lock_file' for use specifically when the lock is held over '.git/shallow'. These wrappers (appropriately called 'commit_shallow_file' and 'rollback_shallow_file') call into their respective functions in 'lockfile.h', but additionally reset validity checks used by the shallow machinery. Replace each instance of 'commit_lock_file' and 'rollback_lock_file' with 'commit_shallow_file' and 'rollback_shallow_file' when the lock being held is over the '.git/shallow' file. As a result, 'prune_shallow' can now only be called once (since 'check_shallow_file_for_update' will die after calling 'reset_repository_shallow'). But, this is OK since we only call 'prune_shallow' at most once per process. Helped-by: Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com> Helped-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> Signed-off-by: Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com> Reviewed-by: Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2020-04-23 02:25:45 +02:00
rollback_shallow_file(the_repository, &shallow_lock);
}
strbuf_release(&sb);
}
struct trace_key trace_shallow = TRACE_KEY_INIT(SHALLOW);
shallow.c: the 8 steps to select new commits for .git/shallow Suppose a fetch or push is requested between two shallow repositories (with no history deepening or shortening). A pack that contains necessary objects is transferred over together with .git/shallow of the sender. The receiver has to determine whether it needs to update .git/shallow if new refs needs new shallow comits. The rule here is avoid updating .git/shallow by default. But we don't want to waste the received pack. If the pack contains two refs, one needs new shallow commits installed in .git/shallow and one does not, we keep the latter and reject/warn about the former. Even if .git/shallow update is allowed, we only add shallow commits strictly necessary for the former ref (remember the sender can send more shallow commits than necessary) and pay attention not to accidentally cut the receiver history short (no history shortening is asked for) So the steps to figure out what ref need what new shallow commits are: 1. Split the sender shallow commit list into "ours" and "theirs" list by has_sha1_file. Those that exist in current repo in "ours", the remaining in "theirs". 2. Check the receiver .git/shallow, remove from "ours" the ones that also exist in .git/shallow. 3. Fetch the new pack. Either install or unpack it. 4. Do has_sha1_file on "theirs" list again. Drop the ones that fail has_sha1_file. Obviously the new pack does not need them. 5. If the pack is kept, remove from "ours" the ones that do not exist in the new pack. 6. Walk the new refs to answer the question "what shallow commits, both ours and theirs, are required in .git/shallow in order to add this ref?". Shallow commits not associated to any refs are removed from their respective list. 7. (*) Check reachability (from the current refs) of all remaining commits in "ours". Those reachable are removed. We do not want to cut any part of our (reachable) history. We only check up commits. True reachability test is done by check_everything_connected() at the end as usual. 8. Combine the final "ours" and "theirs" and add them all to .git/shallow. Install new refs. The case where some hook rejects some refs on a push is explained in more detail in the push patches. Of these steps, #6 and #7 are expensive. Both require walking through some commits, or in the worst case all commits. And we rather avoid them in at least common case, where the transferred pack does not contain any shallow commits that the sender advertises. Let's look at each scenario: 1) the sender has longer history than the receiver All shallow commits from the sender will be put into "theirs" list at step 1 because none of them exists in current repo. In the common case, "theirs" becomes empty at step 4 and exit early. 2) the sender has shorter history than the receiver All shallow commits from the sender are likely in "ours" list at step 1. In the common case, if the new pack is kept, we could empty "ours" and exit early at step 5. If the pack is not kept, we hit the expensive step 6 then exit after "ours" is emptied. There'll be only a handful of objects to walk in fast-forward case. If it's forced update, we may need to walk to the bottom. 3) the sender has same .git/shallow as the receiver This is similar to case 2 except that "ours" should be emptied at step 2 and exit early. A fetch after "clone --depth=X" is case 1. A fetch after "clone" (from a shallow repo) is case 3. Luckily they're cheap for the common case. A push from "clone --depth=X" falls into case 2, which is expensive. Some more work may be done at the sender/client side to avoid more work on the server side: if the transferred pack does not contain any shallow commits, send-pack should not send any shallow commits to the receive-pack, effectively turning it into a normal push and avoid all steps. This patch implements all steps except #3, already handled by fetch-pack and receive-pack, #6 and #7, which has their own patch due to their size. (*) in previous versions step 7 was put before step 3. I reorder it so that the common case that keeps the pack does not need to walk commits at all. In future if we implement faster commit reachability check (maybe with the help of pack bitmaps or commit cache), step 7 could become cheap and be moved up before 6 again. Signed-off-by: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy <pclouds@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2013-12-05 14:02:35 +01:00
/*
* Step 1, split sender shallow commits into "ours" and "theirs"
* Step 2, clean "ours" based on .git/shallow
*/
void prepare_shallow_info(struct shallow_info *info, struct oid_array *sa)
shallow.c: the 8 steps to select new commits for .git/shallow Suppose a fetch or push is requested between two shallow repositories (with no history deepening or shortening). A pack that contains necessary objects is transferred over together with .git/shallow of the sender. The receiver has to determine whether it needs to update .git/shallow if new refs needs new shallow comits. The rule here is avoid updating .git/shallow by default. But we don't want to waste the received pack. If the pack contains two refs, one needs new shallow commits installed in .git/shallow and one does not, we keep the latter and reject/warn about the former. Even if .git/shallow update is allowed, we only add shallow commits strictly necessary for the former ref (remember the sender can send more shallow commits than necessary) and pay attention not to accidentally cut the receiver history short (no history shortening is asked for) So the steps to figure out what ref need what new shallow commits are: 1. Split the sender shallow commit list into "ours" and "theirs" list by has_sha1_file. Those that exist in current repo in "ours", the remaining in "theirs". 2. Check the receiver .git/shallow, remove from "ours" the ones that also exist in .git/shallow. 3. Fetch the new pack. Either install or unpack it. 4. Do has_sha1_file on "theirs" list again. Drop the ones that fail has_sha1_file. Obviously the new pack does not need them. 5. If the pack is kept, remove from "ours" the ones that do not exist in the new pack. 6. Walk the new refs to answer the question "what shallow commits, both ours and theirs, are required in .git/shallow in order to add this ref?". Shallow commits not associated to any refs are removed from their respective list. 7. (*) Check reachability (from the current refs) of all remaining commits in "ours". Those reachable are removed. We do not want to cut any part of our (reachable) history. We only check up commits. True reachability test is done by check_everything_connected() at the end as usual. 8. Combine the final "ours" and "theirs" and add them all to .git/shallow. Install new refs. The case where some hook rejects some refs on a push is explained in more detail in the push patches. Of these steps, #6 and #7 are expensive. Both require walking through some commits, or in the worst case all commits. And we rather avoid them in at least common case, where the transferred pack does not contain any shallow commits that the sender advertises. Let's look at each scenario: 1) the sender has longer history than the receiver All shallow commits from the sender will be put into "theirs" list at step 1 because none of them exists in current repo. In the common case, "theirs" becomes empty at step 4 and exit early. 2) the sender has shorter history than the receiver All shallow commits from the sender are likely in "ours" list at step 1. In the common case, if the new pack is kept, we could empty "ours" and exit early at step 5. If the pack is not kept, we hit the expensive step 6 then exit after "ours" is emptied. There'll be only a handful of objects to walk in fast-forward case. If it's forced update, we may need to walk to the bottom. 3) the sender has same .git/shallow as the receiver This is similar to case 2 except that "ours" should be emptied at step 2 and exit early. A fetch after "clone --depth=X" is case 1. A fetch after "clone" (from a shallow repo) is case 3. Luckily they're cheap for the common case. A push from "clone --depth=X" falls into case 2, which is expensive. Some more work may be done at the sender/client side to avoid more work on the server side: if the transferred pack does not contain any shallow commits, send-pack should not send any shallow commits to the receive-pack, effectively turning it into a normal push and avoid all steps. This patch implements all steps except #3, already handled by fetch-pack and receive-pack, #6 and #7, which has their own patch due to their size. (*) in previous versions step 7 was put before step 3. I reorder it so that the common case that keeps the pack does not need to walk commits at all. In future if we implement faster commit reachability check (maybe with the help of pack bitmaps or commit cache), step 7 could become cheap and be moved up before 6 again. Signed-off-by: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy <pclouds@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2013-12-05 14:02:35 +01:00
{
int i;
trace_printf_key(&trace_shallow, "shallow: prepare_shallow_info\n");
shallow.c: the 8 steps to select new commits for .git/shallow Suppose a fetch or push is requested between two shallow repositories (with no history deepening or shortening). A pack that contains necessary objects is transferred over together with .git/shallow of the sender. The receiver has to determine whether it needs to update .git/shallow if new refs needs new shallow comits. The rule here is avoid updating .git/shallow by default. But we don't want to waste the received pack. If the pack contains two refs, one needs new shallow commits installed in .git/shallow and one does not, we keep the latter and reject/warn about the former. Even if .git/shallow update is allowed, we only add shallow commits strictly necessary for the former ref (remember the sender can send more shallow commits than necessary) and pay attention not to accidentally cut the receiver history short (no history shortening is asked for) So the steps to figure out what ref need what new shallow commits are: 1. Split the sender shallow commit list into "ours" and "theirs" list by has_sha1_file. Those that exist in current repo in "ours", the remaining in "theirs". 2. Check the receiver .git/shallow, remove from "ours" the ones that also exist in .git/shallow. 3. Fetch the new pack. Either install or unpack it. 4. Do has_sha1_file on "theirs" list again. Drop the ones that fail has_sha1_file. Obviously the new pack does not need them. 5. If the pack is kept, remove from "ours" the ones that do not exist in the new pack. 6. Walk the new refs to answer the question "what shallow commits, both ours and theirs, are required in .git/shallow in order to add this ref?". Shallow commits not associated to any refs are removed from their respective list. 7. (*) Check reachability (from the current refs) of all remaining commits in "ours". Those reachable are removed. We do not want to cut any part of our (reachable) history. We only check up commits. True reachability test is done by check_everything_connected() at the end as usual. 8. Combine the final "ours" and "theirs" and add them all to .git/shallow. Install new refs. The case where some hook rejects some refs on a push is explained in more detail in the push patches. Of these steps, #6 and #7 are expensive. Both require walking through some commits, or in the worst case all commits. And we rather avoid them in at least common case, where the transferred pack does not contain any shallow commits that the sender advertises. Let's look at each scenario: 1) the sender has longer history than the receiver All shallow commits from the sender will be put into "theirs" list at step 1 because none of them exists in current repo. In the common case, "theirs" becomes empty at step 4 and exit early. 2) the sender has shorter history than the receiver All shallow commits from the sender are likely in "ours" list at step 1. In the common case, if the new pack is kept, we could empty "ours" and exit early at step 5. If the pack is not kept, we hit the expensive step 6 then exit after "ours" is emptied. There'll be only a handful of objects to walk in fast-forward case. If it's forced update, we may need to walk to the bottom. 3) the sender has same .git/shallow as the receiver This is similar to case 2 except that "ours" should be emptied at step 2 and exit early. A fetch after "clone --depth=X" is case 1. A fetch after "clone" (from a shallow repo) is case 3. Luckily they're cheap for the common case. A push from "clone --depth=X" falls into case 2, which is expensive. Some more work may be done at the sender/client side to avoid more work on the server side: if the transferred pack does not contain any shallow commits, send-pack should not send any shallow commits to the receive-pack, effectively turning it into a normal push and avoid all steps. This patch implements all steps except #3, already handled by fetch-pack and receive-pack, #6 and #7, which has their own patch due to their size. (*) in previous versions step 7 was put before step 3. I reorder it so that the common case that keeps the pack does not need to walk commits at all. In future if we implement faster commit reachability check (maybe with the help of pack bitmaps or commit cache), step 7 could become cheap and be moved up before 6 again. Signed-off-by: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy <pclouds@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2013-12-05 14:02:35 +01:00
memset(info, 0, sizeof(*info));
info->shallow = sa;
if (!sa)
return;
ALLOC_ARRAY(info->ours, sa->nr);
ALLOC_ARRAY(info->theirs, sa->nr);
shallow.c: the 8 steps to select new commits for .git/shallow Suppose a fetch or push is requested between two shallow repositories (with no history deepening or shortening). A pack that contains necessary objects is transferred over together with .git/shallow of the sender. The receiver has to determine whether it needs to update .git/shallow if new refs needs new shallow comits. The rule here is avoid updating .git/shallow by default. But we don't want to waste the received pack. If the pack contains two refs, one needs new shallow commits installed in .git/shallow and one does not, we keep the latter and reject/warn about the former. Even if .git/shallow update is allowed, we only add shallow commits strictly necessary for the former ref (remember the sender can send more shallow commits than necessary) and pay attention not to accidentally cut the receiver history short (no history shortening is asked for) So the steps to figure out what ref need what new shallow commits are: 1. Split the sender shallow commit list into "ours" and "theirs" list by has_sha1_file. Those that exist in current repo in "ours", the remaining in "theirs". 2. Check the receiver .git/shallow, remove from "ours" the ones that also exist in .git/shallow. 3. Fetch the new pack. Either install or unpack it. 4. Do has_sha1_file on "theirs" list again. Drop the ones that fail has_sha1_file. Obviously the new pack does not need them. 5. If the pack is kept, remove from "ours" the ones that do not exist in the new pack. 6. Walk the new refs to answer the question "what shallow commits, both ours and theirs, are required in .git/shallow in order to add this ref?". Shallow commits not associated to any refs are removed from their respective list. 7. (*) Check reachability (from the current refs) of all remaining commits in "ours". Those reachable are removed. We do not want to cut any part of our (reachable) history. We only check up commits. True reachability test is done by check_everything_connected() at the end as usual. 8. Combine the final "ours" and "theirs" and add them all to .git/shallow. Install new refs. The case where some hook rejects some refs on a push is explained in more detail in the push patches. Of these steps, #6 and #7 are expensive. Both require walking through some commits, or in the worst case all commits. And we rather avoid them in at least common case, where the transferred pack does not contain any shallow commits that the sender advertises. Let's look at each scenario: 1) the sender has longer history than the receiver All shallow commits from the sender will be put into "theirs" list at step 1 because none of them exists in current repo. In the common case, "theirs" becomes empty at step 4 and exit early. 2) the sender has shorter history than the receiver All shallow commits from the sender are likely in "ours" list at step 1. In the common case, if the new pack is kept, we could empty "ours" and exit early at step 5. If the pack is not kept, we hit the expensive step 6 then exit after "ours" is emptied. There'll be only a handful of objects to walk in fast-forward case. If it's forced update, we may need to walk to the bottom. 3) the sender has same .git/shallow as the receiver This is similar to case 2 except that "ours" should be emptied at step 2 and exit early. A fetch after "clone --depth=X" is case 1. A fetch after "clone" (from a shallow repo) is case 3. Luckily they're cheap for the common case. A push from "clone --depth=X" falls into case 2, which is expensive. Some more work may be done at the sender/client side to avoid more work on the server side: if the transferred pack does not contain any shallow commits, send-pack should not send any shallow commits to the receive-pack, effectively turning it into a normal push and avoid all steps. This patch implements all steps except #3, already handled by fetch-pack and receive-pack, #6 and #7, which has their own patch due to their size. (*) in previous versions step 7 was put before step 3. I reorder it so that the common case that keeps the pack does not need to walk commits at all. In future if we implement faster commit reachability check (maybe with the help of pack bitmaps or commit cache), step 7 could become cheap and be moved up before 6 again. Signed-off-by: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy <pclouds@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2013-12-05 14:02:35 +01:00
for (i = 0; i < sa->nr; i++) {
if (has_object_file(sa->oid + i)) {
shallow.c: the 8 steps to select new commits for .git/shallow Suppose a fetch or push is requested between two shallow repositories (with no history deepening or shortening). A pack that contains necessary objects is transferred over together with .git/shallow of the sender. The receiver has to determine whether it needs to update .git/shallow if new refs needs new shallow comits. The rule here is avoid updating .git/shallow by default. But we don't want to waste the received pack. If the pack contains two refs, one needs new shallow commits installed in .git/shallow and one does not, we keep the latter and reject/warn about the former. Even if .git/shallow update is allowed, we only add shallow commits strictly necessary for the former ref (remember the sender can send more shallow commits than necessary) and pay attention not to accidentally cut the receiver history short (no history shortening is asked for) So the steps to figure out what ref need what new shallow commits are: 1. Split the sender shallow commit list into "ours" and "theirs" list by has_sha1_file. Those that exist in current repo in "ours", the remaining in "theirs". 2. Check the receiver .git/shallow, remove from "ours" the ones that also exist in .git/shallow. 3. Fetch the new pack. Either install or unpack it. 4. Do has_sha1_file on "theirs" list again. Drop the ones that fail has_sha1_file. Obviously the new pack does not need them. 5. If the pack is kept, remove from "ours" the ones that do not exist in the new pack. 6. Walk the new refs to answer the question "what shallow commits, both ours and theirs, are required in .git/shallow in order to add this ref?". Shallow commits not associated to any refs are removed from their respective list. 7. (*) Check reachability (from the current refs) of all remaining commits in "ours". Those reachable are removed. We do not want to cut any part of our (reachable) history. We only check up commits. True reachability test is done by check_everything_connected() at the end as usual. 8. Combine the final "ours" and "theirs" and add them all to .git/shallow. Install new refs. The case where some hook rejects some refs on a push is explained in more detail in the push patches. Of these steps, #6 and #7 are expensive. Both require walking through some commits, or in the worst case all commits. And we rather avoid them in at least common case, where the transferred pack does not contain any shallow commits that the sender advertises. Let's look at each scenario: 1) the sender has longer history than the receiver All shallow commits from the sender will be put into "theirs" list at step 1 because none of them exists in current repo. In the common case, "theirs" becomes empty at step 4 and exit early. 2) the sender has shorter history than the receiver All shallow commits from the sender are likely in "ours" list at step 1. In the common case, if the new pack is kept, we could empty "ours" and exit early at step 5. If the pack is not kept, we hit the expensive step 6 then exit after "ours" is emptied. There'll be only a handful of objects to walk in fast-forward case. If it's forced update, we may need to walk to the bottom. 3) the sender has same .git/shallow as the receiver This is similar to case 2 except that "ours" should be emptied at step 2 and exit early. A fetch after "clone --depth=X" is case 1. A fetch after "clone" (from a shallow repo) is case 3. Luckily they're cheap for the common case. A push from "clone --depth=X" falls into case 2, which is expensive. Some more work may be done at the sender/client side to avoid more work on the server side: if the transferred pack does not contain any shallow commits, send-pack should not send any shallow commits to the receive-pack, effectively turning it into a normal push and avoid all steps. This patch implements all steps except #3, already handled by fetch-pack and receive-pack, #6 and #7, which has their own patch due to their size. (*) in previous versions step 7 was put before step 3. I reorder it so that the common case that keeps the pack does not need to walk commits at all. In future if we implement faster commit reachability check (maybe with the help of pack bitmaps or commit cache), step 7 could become cheap and be moved up before 6 again. Signed-off-by: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy <pclouds@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2013-12-05 14:02:35 +01:00
struct commit_graft *graft;
graft = lookup_commit_graft(the_repository,
&sa->oid[i]);
shallow.c: the 8 steps to select new commits for .git/shallow Suppose a fetch or push is requested between two shallow repositories (with no history deepening or shortening). A pack that contains necessary objects is transferred over together with .git/shallow of the sender. The receiver has to determine whether it needs to update .git/shallow if new refs needs new shallow comits. The rule here is avoid updating .git/shallow by default. But we don't want to waste the received pack. If the pack contains two refs, one needs new shallow commits installed in .git/shallow and one does not, we keep the latter and reject/warn about the former. Even if .git/shallow update is allowed, we only add shallow commits strictly necessary for the former ref (remember the sender can send more shallow commits than necessary) and pay attention not to accidentally cut the receiver history short (no history shortening is asked for) So the steps to figure out what ref need what new shallow commits are: 1. Split the sender shallow commit list into "ours" and "theirs" list by has_sha1_file. Those that exist in current repo in "ours", the remaining in "theirs". 2. Check the receiver .git/shallow, remove from "ours" the ones that also exist in .git/shallow. 3. Fetch the new pack. Either install or unpack it. 4. Do has_sha1_file on "theirs" list again. Drop the ones that fail has_sha1_file. Obviously the new pack does not need them. 5. If the pack is kept, remove from "ours" the ones that do not exist in the new pack. 6. Walk the new refs to answer the question "what shallow commits, both ours and theirs, are required in .git/shallow in order to add this ref?". Shallow commits not associated to any refs are removed from their respective list. 7. (*) Check reachability (from the current refs) of all remaining commits in "ours". Those reachable are removed. We do not want to cut any part of our (reachable) history. We only check up commits. True reachability test is done by check_everything_connected() at the end as usual. 8. Combine the final "ours" and "theirs" and add them all to .git/shallow. Install new refs. The case where some hook rejects some refs on a push is explained in more detail in the push patches. Of these steps, #6 and #7 are expensive. Both require walking through some commits, or in the worst case all commits. And we rather avoid them in at least common case, where the transferred pack does not contain any shallow commits that the sender advertises. Let's look at each scenario: 1) the sender has longer history than the receiver All shallow commits from the sender will be put into "theirs" list at step 1 because none of them exists in current repo. In the common case, "theirs" becomes empty at step 4 and exit early. 2) the sender has shorter history than the receiver All shallow commits from the sender are likely in "ours" list at step 1. In the common case, if the new pack is kept, we could empty "ours" and exit early at step 5. If the pack is not kept, we hit the expensive step 6 then exit after "ours" is emptied. There'll be only a handful of objects to walk in fast-forward case. If it's forced update, we may need to walk to the bottom. 3) the sender has same .git/shallow as the receiver This is similar to case 2 except that "ours" should be emptied at step 2 and exit early. A fetch after "clone --depth=X" is case 1. A fetch after "clone" (from a shallow repo) is case 3. Luckily they're cheap for the common case. A push from "clone --depth=X" falls into case 2, which is expensive. Some more work may be done at the sender/client side to avoid more work on the server side: if the transferred pack does not contain any shallow commits, send-pack should not send any shallow commits to the receive-pack, effectively turning it into a normal push and avoid all steps. This patch implements all steps except #3, already handled by fetch-pack and receive-pack, #6 and #7, which has their own patch due to their size. (*) in previous versions step 7 was put before step 3. I reorder it so that the common case that keeps the pack does not need to walk commits at all. In future if we implement faster commit reachability check (maybe with the help of pack bitmaps or commit cache), step 7 could become cheap and be moved up before 6 again. Signed-off-by: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy <pclouds@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2013-12-05 14:02:35 +01:00
if (graft && graft->nr_parent < 0)
continue;
info->ours[info->nr_ours++] = i;
} else
info->theirs[info->nr_theirs++] = i;
}
}
void clear_shallow_info(struct shallow_info *info)
{
free(info->ours);
free(info->theirs);
}
/* Step 4, remove non-existent ones in "theirs" after getting the pack */
void remove_nonexistent_theirs_shallow(struct shallow_info *info)
{
struct object_id *oid = info->shallow->oid;
shallow.c: the 8 steps to select new commits for .git/shallow Suppose a fetch or push is requested between two shallow repositories (with no history deepening or shortening). A pack that contains necessary objects is transferred over together with .git/shallow of the sender. The receiver has to determine whether it needs to update .git/shallow if new refs needs new shallow comits. The rule here is avoid updating .git/shallow by default. But we don't want to waste the received pack. If the pack contains two refs, one needs new shallow commits installed in .git/shallow and one does not, we keep the latter and reject/warn about the former. Even if .git/shallow update is allowed, we only add shallow commits strictly necessary for the former ref (remember the sender can send more shallow commits than necessary) and pay attention not to accidentally cut the receiver history short (no history shortening is asked for) So the steps to figure out what ref need what new shallow commits are: 1. Split the sender shallow commit list into "ours" and "theirs" list by has_sha1_file. Those that exist in current repo in "ours", the remaining in "theirs". 2. Check the receiver .git/shallow, remove from "ours" the ones that also exist in .git/shallow. 3. Fetch the new pack. Either install or unpack it. 4. Do has_sha1_file on "theirs" list again. Drop the ones that fail has_sha1_file. Obviously the new pack does not need them. 5. If the pack is kept, remove from "ours" the ones that do not exist in the new pack. 6. Walk the new refs to answer the question "what shallow commits, both ours and theirs, are required in .git/shallow in order to add this ref?". Shallow commits not associated to any refs are removed from their respective list. 7. (*) Check reachability (from the current refs) of all remaining commits in "ours". Those reachable are removed. We do not want to cut any part of our (reachable) history. We only check up commits. True reachability test is done by check_everything_connected() at the end as usual. 8. Combine the final "ours" and "theirs" and add them all to .git/shallow. Install new refs. The case where some hook rejects some refs on a push is explained in more detail in the push patches. Of these steps, #6 and #7 are expensive. Both require walking through some commits, or in the worst case all commits. And we rather avoid them in at least common case, where the transferred pack does not contain any shallow commits that the sender advertises. Let's look at each scenario: 1) the sender has longer history than the receiver All shallow commits from the sender will be put into "theirs" list at step 1 because none of them exists in current repo. In the common case, "theirs" becomes empty at step 4 and exit early. 2) the sender has shorter history than the receiver All shallow commits from the sender are likely in "ours" list at step 1. In the common case, if the new pack is kept, we could empty "ours" and exit early at step 5. If the pack is not kept, we hit the expensive step 6 then exit after "ours" is emptied. There'll be only a handful of objects to walk in fast-forward case. If it's forced update, we may need to walk to the bottom. 3) the sender has same .git/shallow as the receiver This is similar to case 2 except that "ours" should be emptied at step 2 and exit early. A fetch after "clone --depth=X" is case 1. A fetch after "clone" (from a shallow repo) is case 3. Luckily they're cheap for the common case. A push from "clone --depth=X" falls into case 2, which is expensive. Some more work may be done at the sender/client side to avoid more work on the server side: if the transferred pack does not contain any shallow commits, send-pack should not send any shallow commits to the receive-pack, effectively turning it into a normal push and avoid all steps. This patch implements all steps except #3, already handled by fetch-pack and receive-pack, #6 and #7, which has their own patch due to their size. (*) in previous versions step 7 was put before step 3. I reorder it so that the common case that keeps the pack does not need to walk commits at all. In future if we implement faster commit reachability check (maybe with the help of pack bitmaps or commit cache), step 7 could become cheap and be moved up before 6 again. Signed-off-by: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy <pclouds@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2013-12-05 14:02:35 +01:00
int i, dst;
trace_printf_key(&trace_shallow, "shallow: remove_nonexistent_theirs_shallow\n");
shallow.c: the 8 steps to select new commits for .git/shallow Suppose a fetch or push is requested between two shallow repositories (with no history deepening or shortening). A pack that contains necessary objects is transferred over together with .git/shallow of the sender. The receiver has to determine whether it needs to update .git/shallow if new refs needs new shallow comits. The rule here is avoid updating .git/shallow by default. But we don't want to waste the received pack. If the pack contains two refs, one needs new shallow commits installed in .git/shallow and one does not, we keep the latter and reject/warn about the former. Even if .git/shallow update is allowed, we only add shallow commits strictly necessary for the former ref (remember the sender can send more shallow commits than necessary) and pay attention not to accidentally cut the receiver history short (no history shortening is asked for) So the steps to figure out what ref need what new shallow commits are: 1. Split the sender shallow commit list into "ours" and "theirs" list by has_sha1_file. Those that exist in current repo in "ours", the remaining in "theirs". 2. Check the receiver .git/shallow, remove from "ours" the ones that also exist in .git/shallow. 3. Fetch the new pack. Either install or unpack it. 4. Do has_sha1_file on "theirs" list again. Drop the ones that fail has_sha1_file. Obviously the new pack does not need them. 5. If the pack is kept, remove from "ours" the ones that do not exist in the new pack. 6. Walk the new refs to answer the question "what shallow commits, both ours and theirs, are required in .git/shallow in order to add this ref?". Shallow commits not associated to any refs are removed from their respective list. 7. (*) Check reachability (from the current refs) of all remaining commits in "ours". Those reachable are removed. We do not want to cut any part of our (reachable) history. We only check up commits. True reachability test is done by check_everything_connected() at the end as usual. 8. Combine the final "ours" and "theirs" and add them all to .git/shallow. Install new refs. The case where some hook rejects some refs on a push is explained in more detail in the push patches. Of these steps, #6 and #7 are expensive. Both require walking through some commits, or in the worst case all commits. And we rather avoid them in at least common case, where the transferred pack does not contain any shallow commits that the sender advertises. Let's look at each scenario: 1) the sender has longer history than the receiver All shallow commits from the sender will be put into "theirs" list at step 1 because none of them exists in current repo. In the common case, "theirs" becomes empty at step 4 and exit early. 2) the sender has shorter history than the receiver All shallow commits from the sender are likely in "ours" list at step 1. In the common case, if the new pack is kept, we could empty "ours" and exit early at step 5. If the pack is not kept, we hit the expensive step 6 then exit after "ours" is emptied. There'll be only a handful of objects to walk in fast-forward case. If it's forced update, we may need to walk to the bottom. 3) the sender has same .git/shallow as the receiver This is similar to case 2 except that "ours" should be emptied at step 2 and exit early. A fetch after "clone --depth=X" is case 1. A fetch after "clone" (from a shallow repo) is case 3. Luckily they're cheap for the common case. A push from "clone --depth=X" falls into case 2, which is expensive. Some more work may be done at the sender/client side to avoid more work on the server side: if the transferred pack does not contain any shallow commits, send-pack should not send any shallow commits to the receive-pack, effectively turning it into a normal push and avoid all steps. This patch implements all steps except #3, already handled by fetch-pack and receive-pack, #6 and #7, which has their own patch due to their size. (*) in previous versions step 7 was put before step 3. I reorder it so that the common case that keeps the pack does not need to walk commits at all. In future if we implement faster commit reachability check (maybe with the help of pack bitmaps or commit cache), step 7 could become cheap and be moved up before 6 again. Signed-off-by: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy <pclouds@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2013-12-05 14:02:35 +01:00
for (i = dst = 0; i < info->nr_theirs; i++) {
if (i != dst)
info->theirs[dst] = info->theirs[i];
if (has_object_file(oid + info->theirs[i]))
shallow.c: the 8 steps to select new commits for .git/shallow Suppose a fetch or push is requested between two shallow repositories (with no history deepening or shortening). A pack that contains necessary objects is transferred over together with .git/shallow of the sender. The receiver has to determine whether it needs to update .git/shallow if new refs needs new shallow comits. The rule here is avoid updating .git/shallow by default. But we don't want to waste the received pack. If the pack contains two refs, one needs new shallow commits installed in .git/shallow and one does not, we keep the latter and reject/warn about the former. Even if .git/shallow update is allowed, we only add shallow commits strictly necessary for the former ref (remember the sender can send more shallow commits than necessary) and pay attention not to accidentally cut the receiver history short (no history shortening is asked for) So the steps to figure out what ref need what new shallow commits are: 1. Split the sender shallow commit list into "ours" and "theirs" list by has_sha1_file. Those that exist in current repo in "ours", the remaining in "theirs". 2. Check the receiver .git/shallow, remove from "ours" the ones that also exist in .git/shallow. 3. Fetch the new pack. Either install or unpack it. 4. Do has_sha1_file on "theirs" list again. Drop the ones that fail has_sha1_file. Obviously the new pack does not need them. 5. If the pack is kept, remove from "ours" the ones that do not exist in the new pack. 6. Walk the new refs to answer the question "what shallow commits, both ours and theirs, are required in .git/shallow in order to add this ref?". Shallow commits not associated to any refs are removed from their respective list. 7. (*) Check reachability (from the current refs) of all remaining commits in "ours". Those reachable are removed. We do not want to cut any part of our (reachable) history. We only check up commits. True reachability test is done by check_everything_connected() at the end as usual. 8. Combine the final "ours" and "theirs" and add them all to .git/shallow. Install new refs. The case where some hook rejects some refs on a push is explained in more detail in the push patches. Of these steps, #6 and #7 are expensive. Both require walking through some commits, or in the worst case all commits. And we rather avoid them in at least common case, where the transferred pack does not contain any shallow commits that the sender advertises. Let's look at each scenario: 1) the sender has longer history than the receiver All shallow commits from the sender will be put into "theirs" list at step 1 because none of them exists in current repo. In the common case, "theirs" becomes empty at step 4 and exit early. 2) the sender has shorter history than the receiver All shallow commits from the sender are likely in "ours" list at step 1. In the common case, if the new pack is kept, we could empty "ours" and exit early at step 5. If the pack is not kept, we hit the expensive step 6 then exit after "ours" is emptied. There'll be only a handful of objects to walk in fast-forward case. If it's forced update, we may need to walk to the bottom. 3) the sender has same .git/shallow as the receiver This is similar to case 2 except that "ours" should be emptied at step 2 and exit early. A fetch after "clone --depth=X" is case 1. A fetch after "clone" (from a shallow repo) is case 3. Luckily they're cheap for the common case. A push from "clone --depth=X" falls into case 2, which is expensive. Some more work may be done at the sender/client side to avoid more work on the server side: if the transferred pack does not contain any shallow commits, send-pack should not send any shallow commits to the receive-pack, effectively turning it into a normal push and avoid all steps. This patch implements all steps except #3, already handled by fetch-pack and receive-pack, #6 and #7, which has their own patch due to their size. (*) in previous versions step 7 was put before step 3. I reorder it so that the common case that keeps the pack does not need to walk commits at all. In future if we implement faster commit reachability check (maybe with the help of pack bitmaps or commit cache), step 7 could become cheap and be moved up before 6 again. Signed-off-by: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy <pclouds@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2013-12-05 14:02:35 +01:00
dst++;
}
info->nr_theirs = dst;
}
define_commit_slab(ref_bitmap, uint32_t *);
#define POOL_SIZE (512 * 1024)
struct paint_info {
struct ref_bitmap ref_bitmap;
unsigned nr_bits;
char **pools;
char *free, *end;
unsigned pool_count;
};
static uint32_t *paint_alloc(struct paint_info *info)
{
unsigned nr = DIV_ROUND_UP(info->nr_bits, 32);
unsigned size = nr * sizeof(uint32_t);
void *p;
if (!info->pool_count || size > info->end - info->free) {
if (size > POOL_SIZE)
BUG("pool size too small for %d in paint_alloc()",
size);
info->pool_count++;
REALLOC_ARRAY(info->pools, info->pool_count);
info->free = xmalloc(POOL_SIZE);
info->pools[info->pool_count - 1] = info->free;
info->end = info->free + POOL_SIZE;
}
p = info->free;
info->free += size;
return p;
}
/*
* Given a commit SHA-1, walk down to parents until either SEEN,
* UNINTERESTING or BOTTOM is hit. Set the id-th bit in ref_bitmap for
* all walked commits.
*/
static void paint_down(struct paint_info *info, const struct object_id *oid,
unsigned int id)
{
unsigned int i, nr;
struct commit_list *head = NULL;
int bitmap_nr = DIV_ROUND_UP(info->nr_bits, 32);
size_t bitmap_size = st_mult(sizeof(uint32_t), bitmap_nr);
struct commit *c = lookup_commit_reference_gently(the_repository, oid,
1);
uint32_t *tmp; /* to be freed before return */
uint32_t *bitmap;
if (!c)
return;
tmp = xmalloc(bitmap_size);
bitmap = paint_alloc(info);
memset(bitmap, 0, bitmap_size);
bitmap[id / 32] |= (1U << (id % 32));
commit_list_insert(c, &head);
while (head) {
struct commit_list *p;
struct commit *c = pop_commit(&head);
uint32_t **refs = ref_bitmap_at(&info->ref_bitmap, c);
/* XXX check "UNINTERESTING" from pack bitmaps if available */
if (c->object.flags & (SEEN | UNINTERESTING))
continue;
else
c->object.flags |= SEEN;
if (*refs == NULL)
*refs = bitmap;
else {
memcpy(tmp, *refs, bitmap_size);
for (i = 0; i < bitmap_nr; i++)
tmp[i] |= bitmap[i];
if (memcmp(tmp, *refs, bitmap_size)) {
*refs = paint_alloc(info);
memcpy(*refs, tmp, bitmap_size);
}
}
if (c->object.flags & BOTTOM)
continue;
if (parse_commit(c))
die("unable to parse commit %s",
oid_to_hex(&c->object.oid));
for (p = c->parents; p; p = p->next) {
if (p->item->object.flags & SEEN)
continue;
commit_list_insert(p->item, &head);
}
}
nr = get_max_object_index();
for (i = 0; i < nr; i++) {
struct object *o = get_indexed_object(i);
if (o && o->type == OBJ_COMMIT)
o->flags &= ~SEEN;
}
free(tmp);
}
static int mark_uninteresting(const char *refname, const struct object_id *oid,
int flags, void *cb_data)
{
struct commit *commit = lookup_commit_reference_gently(the_repository,
oid, 1);
if (!commit)
return 0;
commit->object.flags |= UNINTERESTING;
mark_parents_uninteresting(commit);
return 0;
}
static void post_assign_shallow(struct shallow_info *info,
struct ref_bitmap *ref_bitmap,
int *ref_status);
/*
* Step 6(+7), associate shallow commits with new refs
*
* info->ref must be initialized before calling this function.
*
* If used is not NULL, it's an array of info->shallow->nr
* bitmaps. The n-th bit set in the m-th bitmap if ref[n] needs the
* m-th shallow commit from info->shallow.
*
* If used is NULL, "ours" and "theirs" are updated. And if ref_status
* is not NULL it's an array of ref->nr ints. ref_status[i] is true if
* the ref needs some shallow commits from either info->ours or
* info->theirs.
*/
void assign_shallow_commits_to_refs(struct shallow_info *info,
uint32_t **used, int *ref_status)
{
struct object_id *oid = info->shallow->oid;
struct oid_array *ref = info->ref;
unsigned int i, nr;
int *shallow, nr_shallow = 0;
struct paint_info pi;
trace_printf_key(&trace_shallow, "shallow: assign_shallow_commits_to_refs\n");
ALLOC_ARRAY(shallow, info->nr_ours + info->nr_theirs);
for (i = 0; i < info->nr_ours; i++)
shallow[nr_shallow++] = info->ours[i];
for (i = 0; i < info->nr_theirs; i++)
shallow[nr_shallow++] = info->theirs[i];
/*
* Prepare the commit graph to track what refs can reach what
* (new) shallow commits.
*/
nr = get_max_object_index();
for (i = 0; i < nr; i++) {
struct object *o = get_indexed_object(i);
if (!o || o->type != OBJ_COMMIT)
continue;
o->flags &= ~(UNINTERESTING | BOTTOM | SEEN);
}
memset(&pi, 0, sizeof(pi));
init_ref_bitmap(&pi.ref_bitmap);
pi.nr_bits = ref->nr;
/*
* "--not --all" to cut short the traversal if new refs
* connect to old refs. If not (e.g. force ref updates) it'll
* have to go down to the current shallow commits.
*/
head_ref(mark_uninteresting, NULL);
for_each_ref(mark_uninteresting, NULL);
/* Mark potential bottoms so we won't go out of bound */
for (i = 0; i < nr_shallow; i++) {
struct commit *c = lookup_commit(the_repository,
&oid[shallow[i]]);
c->object.flags |= BOTTOM;
}
for (i = 0; i < ref->nr; i++)
paint_down(&pi, ref->oid + i, i);
if (used) {
int bitmap_size = DIV_ROUND_UP(pi.nr_bits, 32) * sizeof(uint32_t);
memset(used, 0, sizeof(*used) * info->shallow->nr);
for (i = 0; i < nr_shallow; i++) {
const struct commit *c = lookup_commit(the_repository,
&oid[shallow[i]]);
uint32_t **map = ref_bitmap_at(&pi.ref_bitmap, c);
if (*map)
used[shallow[i]] = xmemdupz(*map, bitmap_size);
}
/*
* unreachable shallow commits are not removed from
* "ours" and "theirs". The user is supposed to run
* step 7 on every ref separately and not trust "ours"
* and "theirs" any more.
*/
} else
post_assign_shallow(info, &pi.ref_bitmap, ref_status);
clear_ref_bitmap(&pi.ref_bitmap);
for (i = 0; i < pi.pool_count; i++)
free(pi.pools[i]);
free(pi.pools);
free(shallow);
}
struct commit_array {
struct commit **commits;
int nr, alloc;
};
static int add_ref(const char *refname, const struct object_id *oid,
int flags, void *cb_data)
{
struct commit_array *ca = cb_data;
ALLOC_GROW(ca->commits, ca->nr + 1, ca->alloc);
ca->commits[ca->nr] = lookup_commit_reference_gently(the_repository,
oid, 1);
if (ca->commits[ca->nr])
ca->nr++;
return 0;
}
static void update_refstatus(int *ref_status, int nr, uint32_t *bitmap)
{
unsigned int i;
if (!ref_status)
return;
for (i = 0; i < nr; i++)
if (bitmap[i / 32] & (1U << (i % 32)))
ref_status[i]++;
}
/*
* Step 7, reachability test on "ours" at commit level
*/
static void post_assign_shallow(struct shallow_info *info,
struct ref_bitmap *ref_bitmap,
int *ref_status)
{
struct object_id *oid = info->shallow->oid;
struct commit *c;
uint32_t **bitmap;
int dst, i, j;
int bitmap_nr = DIV_ROUND_UP(info->ref->nr, 32);
struct commit_array ca;
trace_printf_key(&trace_shallow, "shallow: post_assign_shallow\n");
if (ref_status)
memset(ref_status, 0, sizeof(*ref_status) * info->ref->nr);
/* Remove unreachable shallow commits from "theirs" */
for (i = dst = 0; i < info->nr_theirs; i++) {
if (i != dst)
info->theirs[dst] = info->theirs[i];
c = lookup_commit(the_repository, &oid[info->theirs[i]]);
bitmap = ref_bitmap_at(ref_bitmap, c);
if (!*bitmap)
continue;
for (j = 0; j < bitmap_nr; j++)
if (bitmap[0][j]) {
update_refstatus(ref_status, info->ref->nr, *bitmap);
dst++;
break;
}
}
info->nr_theirs = dst;
memset(&ca, 0, sizeof(ca));
head_ref(add_ref, &ca);
for_each_ref(add_ref, &ca);
/* Remove unreachable shallow commits from "ours" */
for (i = dst = 0; i < info->nr_ours; i++) {
if (i != dst)
info->ours[dst] = info->ours[i];
c = lookup_commit(the_repository, &oid[info->ours[i]]);
bitmap = ref_bitmap_at(ref_bitmap, c);
if (!*bitmap)
continue;
for (j = 0; j < bitmap_nr; j++)
if (bitmap[0][j] &&
/* Step 7, reachability test at commit level */
!in_merge_bases_many(c, ca.nr, ca.commits)) {
update_refstatus(ref_status, info->ref->nr, *bitmap);
dst++;
break;
}
}
info->nr_ours = dst;
free(ca.commits);
}
/* (Delayed) step 7, reachability test at commit level */
int delayed_reachability_test(struct shallow_info *si, int c)
{
if (si->need_reachability_test[c]) {
struct commit *commit = lookup_commit(the_repository,
&si->shallow->oid[c]);
if (!si->commits) {
struct commit_array ca;
memset(&ca, 0, sizeof(ca));
head_ref(add_ref, &ca);
for_each_ref(add_ref, &ca);
si->commits = ca.commits;
si->nr_commits = ca.nr;
}
si->reachable[c] = in_merge_bases_many(commit,
si->nr_commits,
si->commits);
si->need_reachability_test[c] = 0;
}
return si->reachable[c];
}