From: Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com>
To: peff@peff.net
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/23] parse_commit_buffer(): treat lookup_tree() failure as parse error
Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2019 16:12:20 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191024231220.96547-1-jonathantanmy@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191018044328.GB17879@sigill.intra.peff.net>
> And
> certainly we _have_ seen real-world cases, such as the one fixed by
> 806278dead (commit-graph.c: handle corrupt/missing trees, 2019-09-05).
>
> Note that we can't quite drop the check in the caller added by that
> commit yet, as there's some subtlety with repeated parsings (which will
> be addressed in a future commit).
I tried figuring out what the subtlety is by undoing the check you
describe, and did get a segfault in one of the tests, but couldn't
figure out exactly what is going on. Looking at the code, is it because
load_tree_for_commit() in commit-graph.c uses the return value of
lookup_tree() indiscriminately (which is the issue that this patch
fixes)?
This patch itself and patch 1 looks good (with the reasoning in the
commit message), of course.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-10-24 23:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 39+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-10-18 4:41 [PATCH 0/23] parsing and fsck cleanups Jeff King
2019-10-18 4:42 ` [PATCH 01/23] parse_commit_buffer(): treat lookup_commit() failure as parse error Jeff King
2019-10-24 3:37 ` Junio C Hamano
2019-10-24 18:01 ` Jeff King
2019-10-18 4:43 ` [PATCH 02/23] parse_commit_buffer(): treat lookup_tree() " Jeff King
2019-10-24 23:12 ` Jonathan Tan [this message]
2019-10-24 23:22 ` Jeff King
2019-10-18 4:45 ` [PATCH 03/23] parse_tag_buffer(): treat NULL tag pointer " Jeff King
2019-10-18 4:47 ` [PATCH 04/23] remember commit/tag parse failures Jeff King
2019-10-24 3:51 ` Junio C Hamano
2019-10-24 23:25 ` Jonathan Tan
2019-10-24 23:41 ` Jeff King
2019-10-18 4:48 ` [PATCH 05/23] fsck: stop checking commit->tree value Jeff King
2019-10-24 3:57 ` Junio C Hamano
2019-10-18 4:49 ` [PATCH 06/23] fsck: stop checking commit->parent counts Jeff King
2019-10-18 4:51 ` [PATCH 07/23] fsck: stop checking tag->tagged Jeff King
2019-10-18 4:54 ` [PATCH 08/23] fsck: require an actual buffer for non-blobs Jeff King
2019-10-18 4:56 ` [PATCH 09/23] fsck: unify object-name code Jeff King
2019-10-24 6:05 ` Junio C Hamano
2019-10-24 18:07 ` Jeff King
2019-10-25 3:23 ` Junio C Hamano
2019-10-25 21:20 ` Jeff King
2019-10-18 4:56 ` [PATCH 10/23] fsck_describe_object(): build on our get_object_name() primitive Jeff King
2019-10-24 6:06 ` Junio C Hamano
2019-10-18 4:57 ` [PATCH 11/23] fsck: use oids rather than objects for object_name API Jeff King
2019-10-18 4:58 ` [PATCH 12/23] fsck: don't require object structs for display functions Jeff King
2019-10-18 4:58 ` [PATCH 13/23] fsck: only provide oid/type in fsck_error callback Jeff King
2019-10-18 4:58 ` [PATCH 14/23] fsck: only require an oid for skiplist functions Jeff King
2019-10-18 4:59 ` [PATCH 15/23] fsck: don't require an object struct for report() Jeff King
2019-10-18 4:59 ` [PATCH 16/23] fsck: accept an oid instead of a "struct blob" for fsck_blob() Jeff King
2019-10-18 4:59 ` [PATCH 17/23] fsck: drop blob struct from fsck_finish() Jeff King
2019-10-18 5:00 ` [PATCH 18/23] fsck: don't require an object struct for fsck_ident() Jeff King
2019-10-18 5:00 ` [PATCH 19/23] fsck: don't require an object struct in verify_headers() Jeff King
2019-10-18 5:00 ` [PATCH 20/23] fsck: rename vague "oid" local variables Jeff King
2019-10-18 5:01 ` [PATCH 21/23] fsck: accept an oid instead of a "struct tag" for fsck_tag() Jeff King
2019-10-18 5:01 ` [PATCH 22/23] fsck: accept an oid instead of a "struct commit" for fsck_commit() Jeff King
2019-10-18 5:02 ` [PATCH 23/23] fsck: accept an oid instead of a "struct tree" for fsck_tree() Jeff King
2019-10-24 23:49 ` [PATCH 0/23] parsing and fsck cleanups Jonathan Tan
2019-10-25 3:11 ` Junio C Hamano
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=20191024231220.96547-1-jonathantanmy@google.com \
--to=jonathantanmy@google.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=peff@peff.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.