From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
To: "Marc Strapetz via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@gmail.com>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Marc Strapetz <marc.strapetz@syntevo.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] t7508: add tests capturing racy timestamp handling
Date: Wed, 05 Jan 2022 12:59:25 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <xmqqczl5hpaq.fsf@gitster.g> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7d58f80611193f8696d99e317fe6b1e53ac740f7.1641388523.git.gitgitgadget@gmail.com> (Marc Strapetz via GitGitGadget's message of "Wed, 05 Jan 2022 13:15:22 +0000")
"Marc Strapetz via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@gmail.com> writes:
> From: Marc Strapetz <marc.strapetz@syntevo.com>
>
> "git status" fixes racy timestamps regardless of the worktree being
> dirty or not. The new test cases capture this behavior.
>
> Signed-off-by: Marc Strapetz <marc.strapetz@syntevo.com>
> ---
> t/t7508-status.sh | 28 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 file changed, 28 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/t/t7508-status.sh b/t/t7508-status.sh
> index 05c6c02435d..652cbb5ed2e 100755
> --- a/t/t7508-status.sh
> +++ b/t/t7508-status.sh
> @@ -1656,4 +1656,32 @@ test_expect_success '--no-optional-locks prevents index update' '
> ! grep ^1234567890 out
> '
>
> +test_expect_success 'racy timestamps will be fixed for clean worktree' '
> + echo content >racy-dirty &&
> + echo content >racy-racy &&
> + git add racy* &&
> + git commit -m "racy test files" &&
> + # let status rewrite the index, if necessary; after that we expect
> + # no more index writes unless caused by racy timestamps; note that
> + # timestamps may already be racy now (depending on previous tests)
> + git status &&
> + test-tool chmtime =1234567890 .git/index &&
> + test-tool chmtime --get .git/index >out &&
> + grep ^1234567890 out &&
If file contents were 1234567890999, this will still hit, but I do
not think that is what you wanted to see. Perhaps
git status &&
echo 1234567890 >expect &&
test-tool chmtime=$(cat expect) .git/index &&
test-tool chmtime --get .git/index >actual &&
test_cmp expect actual
or something? But I think you inherited this bogosity from the
previous test, so I am OK to add a few more copies of the same
bogosity to the test.
Somebody later has to step in and clean them all up, though. When
that happens, we should document how the magic 1234567890 timestamp
was chosen near its first use.
I think it is because it is a timestamp in year 2009, so as long as
your filetime clock is reasonably accurate, a write to the file
would never get such a low timestamp.
> + git status &&
> + test-tool chmtime --get .git/index >out &&
> + ! grep ^1234567890 out
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2022-01-05 20:59 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-12-22 13:56 [PATCH] update-index: refresh should rewrite index in case of racy timestamps Marc Strapetz via GitGitGadget
2021-12-22 23:52 ` Junio C Hamano
2021-12-23 18:24 ` Marc Strapetz
2022-01-05 13:15 ` [PATCH v2 0/2] " Marc Strapetz via GitGitGadget
2022-01-05 13:15 ` [PATCH v2 1/2] t7508: add tests capturing racy timestamp handling Marc Strapetz via GitGitGadget
2022-01-05 20:59 ` Junio C Hamano [this message]
2022-01-06 10:21 ` Marc Strapetz
2022-01-05 13:15 ` [PATCH v2 2/2] update-index: refresh should rewrite index in case of racy timestamps Marc Strapetz via GitGitGadget
2022-01-05 21:03 ` Junio C Hamano
2022-01-06 22:34 ` [PATCH v3 0/4] " Marc Strapetz via GitGitGadget
2022-01-06 22:34 ` [PATCH v3 1/4] test-lib: introduce API for verifying file mtime Marc Strapetz via GitGitGadget
2022-01-06 23:55 ` Junio C Hamano
2022-01-06 22:34 ` [PATCH v3 2/4] t7508: fix bogus mtime verification Marc Strapetz via GitGitGadget
2022-01-06 22:34 ` [PATCH v3 3/4] t7508: add tests capturing racy timestamp handling Marc Strapetz via GitGitGadget
2022-01-06 22:34 ` [PATCH v3 4/4] update-index: refresh should rewrite index in case of racy timestamps Marc Strapetz via GitGitGadget
2022-01-07 11:17 ` [PATCH v4 0/4] " Marc Strapetz via GitGitGadget
2022-01-07 11:17 ` [PATCH v4 1/4] test-lib: introduce API for verifying file mtime Marc Strapetz via GitGitGadget
2022-01-07 11:17 ` [PATCH v4 2/4] t7508: fix bogus mtime verification Marc Strapetz via GitGitGadget
2022-01-07 11:17 ` [PATCH v4 3/4] t7508: add tests capturing racy timestamp handling Marc Strapetz via GitGitGadget
2022-01-07 11:17 ` [PATCH v4 4/4] update-index: refresh should rewrite index in case of racy timestamps Marc Strapetz via GitGitGadget
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=xmqqczl5hpaq.fsf@gitster.g \
--to=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitgitgadget@gmail.com \
--cc=marc.strapetz@syntevo.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).