[Failure] Re: git 2.40.0-rc1

[Failure] Re: git 2.40.0-rc1

[rsbecker]

Hi All,

Git 2.40.0-rc2 was a regression from rc1. The following new tests failed:

t3206 - virtually all subtests failed. An example of this failure is a
results comparison in subtest 1 (seemingly relating to abbreviation):
+ test_cmp expect actual
--- expect      2023-03-02 16:39:23 +0000
+++ actual      2023-03-02 16:39:23 +0000
@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-1:  4de457d = 1:  35b9b25 s/5/A/
-2:  fccce22 = 2:  de345ab s/4/A/
-3:  147e64e = 3:  9af6654 s/11/B/
-4:  a63e992 = 4:  2901f77 s/12/B/
+1:  4de457d2c0d218f48d66f45f9b30f3aa62562105 = 1:
35b9b25f76d404d09a23e6c8efa96c3ce19e19aa s/5/A/
+2:  fccce22f8c95220a7283f047ecc6f042a54ad902 = 2:
de345ab3de2b56a1e208e46197bb77829a6e1f3a s/4/A/
+3:  147e64ef5365f843f378dcfd60c4b8115146a35a = 3:
9af6654000a6c3235196f874c6fa58c970fcf233 s/11/B/
+4:  a63e992599e14e34a5664fe3f213fa8ad8977fe1 = 4:
2901f773f3f322646e189b37ffe99a47ad6d456a s/12/B/

t5562.13,14 failed on gzip problems. This is a transient failure and only
occurs sometimes.

Regards,
Randall

--
Brief whoami: NonStop&UNIX developer since approximately
UNIX(421664400)
NonStop(211288444200000000)
-- In real life, I talk too much.

Re: [Failure] Re: git 2.40.0-rc1

[Junio C Hamano]

<rsbecker@nexbridge.com> writes:

> Git 2.40.0-rc2 was a regression from rc1. The following new tests failed:
>
> t3206 - virtually all subtests failed. An example of this failure is a
> results comparison in subtest 1 (seemingly relating to abbreviation):
> + test_cmp expect actual
> --- expect      2023-03-02 16:39:23 +0000
> +++ actual      2023-03-02 16:39:23 +0000
> @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
> -1:  4de457d = 1:  35b9b25 s/5/A/
> -2:  fccce22 = 2:  de345ab s/4/A/
> -3:  147e64e = 3:  9af6654 s/11/B/
> -4:  a63e992 = 4:  2901f77 s/12/B/
> +1:  4de457d2c0d218f48d66f45f9b30f3aa62562105 = 1:
> 35b9b25f76d404d09a23e6c8efa96c3ce19e19aa s/5/A/

Are any big endian machines involved?

cf. https://lore.kernel.org/git/Y%2F+paI8WGSmEbv%2Fw@pobox.com/

RE: [Failure] Re: git 2.40.0-rc1

[rsbecker]

On Thursday, March 2, 2023 1:44 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
><rsbecker@nexbridge.com> writes:
>
>> Git 2.40.0-rc2 was a regression from rc1. The following new tests failed:
>>
>> t3206 - virtually all subtests failed. An example of this failure is a
>> results comparison in subtest 1 (seemingly relating to abbreviation):
>> + test_cmp expect actual
>> --- expect      2023-03-02 16:39:23 +0000
>> +++ actual      2023-03-02 16:39:23 +0000
>> @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
>> -1:  4de457d = 1:  35b9b25 s/5/A/
>> -2:  fccce22 = 2:  de345ab s/4/A/
>> -3:  147e64e = 3:  9af6654 s/11/B/
>> -4:  a63e992 = 4:  2901f77 s/12/B/
>> +1:  4de457d2c0d218f48d66f45f9b30f3aa62562105 = 1:
>> 35b9b25f76d404d09a23e6c8efa96c3ce19e19aa s/5/A/
>
>Are any big endian machines involved?
>
>cf. https://lore.kernel.org/git/Y%2F+paI8WGSmEbv%2Fw@pobox.com/

Oh yes. All NonStop variants are big-endian. That hasn't changed the SHA-1
signatures though.

Re: [Failure] Re: git 2.40.0-rc1

[Junio C Hamano]

Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> writes:

> <rsbecker@nexbridge.com> writes:
>
>> Git 2.40.0-rc2 was a regression from rc1. The following new tests failed:
>>
>> t3206 - virtually all subtests failed. An example of this failure is a
>> results comparison in subtest 1 (seemingly relating to abbreviation):
>> + test_cmp expect actual
>> --- expect      2023-03-02 16:39:23 +0000
>> +++ actual      2023-03-02 16:39:23 +0000
>> @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
>> -1:  4de457d = 1:  35b9b25 s/5/A/
>> -2:  fccce22 = 2:  de345ab s/4/A/
>> -3:  147e64e = 3:  9af6654 s/11/B/
>> -4:  a63e992 = 4:  2901f77 s/12/B/
>> +1:  4de457d2c0d218f48d66f45f9b30f3aa62562105 = 1:
>> 35b9b25f76d404d09a23e6c8efa96c3ce19e19aa s/5/A/
>
> Are any big endian machines involved?

Sorry, "big endian machines" -> "machines whose char is unsigned".

>
> cf. https://lore.kernel.org/git/Y%2F+paI8WGSmEbv%2Fw@pobox.com/

Re: [Failure] Re: git 2.40.0-rc1

[Junio C Hamano]

<rsbecker@nexbridge.com> writes:

> On Thursday, March 2, 2023 1:44 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>><rsbecker@nexbridge.com> writes:
>>
>>> Git 2.40.0-rc2 was a regression from rc1. The following new tests failed:

I think you are reporting -rc1 relative to -rc0.

>>> t3206 - virtually all subtests failed. An example of this failure is a
>>> results comparison in subtest 1 (seemingly relating to abbreviation):
>>> + test_cmp expect actual
>>> --- expect      2023-03-02 16:39:23 +0000
>>> +++ actual      2023-03-02 16:39:23 +0000
>>> @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
>>> -1:  4de457d = 1:  35b9b25 s/5/A/
>>> -2:  fccce22 = 2:  de345ab s/4/A/
>>> -3:  147e64e = 3:  9af6654 s/11/B/
>>> -4:  a63e992 = 4:  2901f77 s/12/B/
>>> +1:  4de457d2c0d218f48d66f45f9b30f3aa62562105 = 1:
>>> 35b9b25f76d404d09a23e6c8efa96c3ce19e19aa s/5/A/
>>
>>Are any big endian machines involved?
>>
>>cf. https://lore.kernel.org/git/Y%2F+paI8WGSmEbv%2Fw@pobox.com/
>
> Oh yes. All NonStop variants are big-endian. That hasn't changed the SHA-1
> signatures though.

There is a stupid sequence that slipped through the review

	char c = structPtr->intMember;

	if (c < 0)
		... do something ...

and where "char" is "unsigned char", the compiler thinks "do
something" will never trigger and from there everything goes
haywire.

The tip of 'master' already has a fix (and no other changes as of
this writing), and will be part of -rc2.

Thanks.

RE: [Failure] Re: git 2.40.0-rc1

[rsbecker]

On Thursday, March 2, 2023 3:00 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
><rsbecker@nexbridge.com> writes:
>
>> On Thursday, March 2, 2023 1:44 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>>><rsbecker@nexbridge.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> Git 2.40.0-rc2 was a regression from rc1. The following new tests failed:
>
>I think you are reporting -rc1 relative to -rc0.
>
>>>> t3206 - virtually all subtests failed. An example of this failure is
>>>> a results comparison in subtest 1 (seemingly relating to abbreviation):
>>>> + test_cmp expect actual
>>>> --- expect      2023-03-02 16:39:23 +0000
>>>> +++ actual      2023-03-02 16:39:23 +0000
>>>> @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
>>>> -1:  4de457d = 1:  35b9b25 s/5/A/
>>>> -2:  fccce22 = 2:  de345ab s/4/A/
>>>> -3:  147e64e = 3:  9af6654 s/11/B/
>>>> -4:  a63e992 = 4:  2901f77 s/12/B/
>>>> +1:  4de457d2c0d218f48d66f45f9b30f3aa62562105 = 1:
>>>> 35b9b25f76d404d09a23e6c8efa96c3ce19e19aa s/5/A/
>>>
>>>Are any big endian machines involved?
>>>
>>>cf. https://lore.kernel.org/git/Y%2F+paI8WGSmEbv%2Fw@pobox.com/
>>
>> Oh yes. All NonStop variants are big-endian. That hasn't changed the
>> SHA-1 signatures though.
>
>There is a stupid sequence that slipped through the review
>
>	char c = structPtr->intMember;
>
>	if (c < 0)
>		... do something ...
>
>and where "char" is "unsigned char", the compiler thinks "do something" will never
>trigger and from there everything goes haywire.
>
>The tip of 'master' already has a fix (and no other changes as of this writing), and
>will be part of -rc2.

Thank you for the really fast fix on this 😊.
--Randall

Re: [Failure] Re: git 2.40.0-rc1

[Junio C Hamano]

<rsbecker@nexbridge.com> writes:

> On Thursday, March 2, 2023 3:00 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>><rsbecker@nexbridge.com> writes:
>>
>>> On Thursday, March 2, 2023 1:44 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>>>><rsbecker@nexbridge.com> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> Git 2.40.0-rc2 was a regression from rc1. The following new tests failed:
>>
>>I think you are reporting -rc1 relative to -rc0.
>>
>>>>> t3206 - virtually all subtests failed. An example of this failure is
>>>>> a results comparison in subtest 1 (seemingly relating to abbreviation):
>>>>> + test_cmp expect actual
>>>>> --- expect      2023-03-02 16:39:23 +0000
>>>>> +++ actual      2023-03-02 16:39:23 +0000
>>>>> @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
>>>>> -1:  4de457d = 1:  35b9b25 s/5/A/
>>>>> -2:  fccce22 = 2:  de345ab s/4/A/
>>>>> -3:  147e64e = 3:  9af6654 s/11/B/
>>>>> -4:  a63e992 = 4:  2901f77 s/12/B/
>>>>> +1:  4de457d2c0d218f48d66f45f9b30f3aa62562105 = 1:
>>>>> 35b9b25f76d404d09a23e6c8efa96c3ce19e19aa s/5/A/
>>>>
>>>>Are any big endian machines involved?
>>>>
>>>>cf. https://lore.kernel.org/git/Y%2F+paI8WGSmEbv%2Fw@pobox.com/
>>>
>>> Oh yes. All NonStop variants are big-endian. That hasn't changed the
>>> SHA-1 signatures though.
>>
>>There is a stupid sequence that slipped through the review
>>
>>	char c = structPtr->intMember;
>>
>>	if (c < 0)
>>		... do something ...
>>
>>and where "char" is "unsigned char", the compiler thinks "do something" will never
>>trigger and from there everything goes haywire.
>>
>>The tip of 'master' already has a fix (and no other changes as of this writing), and
>>will be part of -rc2.
>
> Thank you for the really fast fix on this 😊.
> --Randall

Don't thank me.  It was René Scharfe who caught and fixed it first,
which happened a few days ago and the URL above was from yesterday.