All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
To: Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fetch-pack: always allow fetching of literal SHA1s
Date: Tue, 9 May 2017 18:16:30 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170509221629.3z35qcz36oiix3kh@sigill.intra.peff.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170509182042.28389-1-jonathantanmy@google.com>

On Tue, May 09, 2017 at 11:20:42AM -0700, Jonathan Tan wrote:

> fetch-pack, when fetching a literal SHA-1 from a server that is not
> configured with uploadpack.allowtipsha1inwant (or similar), always
> returns an error message of the form "Server does not allow request for
> unadvertised object %s". However, it is sometimes the case that such
> object is advertised.
> 
> Teach fetch-pack to also check the SHA-1s of the refs in the received
> ref advertisement if a literal SHA-1 was given by the user.

Hmm. That makes sense generally, as the request should succeed. But it
seems like we're creating a client that will sometimes succeed and
sometimes fail, and the reasoning will be somewhat opaque to the user.
I have a feeling I'm missing some context on when you'd expect this to
kick in.

> +static int is_literal_sha1(const struct ref *ref)
> +{
> +	struct object_id oid;
> +	return !get_oid_hex(ref->name, &oid) &&
> +	       !ref->name[40] &&
> +	       !oidcmp(&oid, &ref->old_oid);
> +}

I think the preferred method these days is to avoid the bare "40":

  struct object_oid oid;
  const char *end;
  return !parse_oid_hex(ref->name, &oid, &end) &&
         !*end &&
	 !oidcmp(&oid, &ref->old_oid);

I was confused at first why we need this oidcmp() and the one below. But
this one is checking "does the name parse to itself", and the other is
checking "does this parse to our sought ref?". So both checks are
needed.

> +			for (i = 0; i < nr_sought; i++) {
> +				struct ref *s = sought[i];
> +				if (!strcmp(ref->name, s->name) ||
> +				    (is_literal_sha1(s) &&
> +				     !oidcmp(&ref->old_oid, &s->old_oid))) {
> +					keep = 1;
> +					s->match_status = REF_MATCHED;
>  				}
> -				i++;
>  			}

This will reparse ref->name as an oid via is_literal_sha1() for each
pass through the loop. Should it be hoisted out? Maybe that is just
premature optimization, though.

Other than those minor nits, the code itself looks fine to me.

-Peff

  reply	other threads:[~2017-05-09 22:16 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 47+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-05-09 18:20 [PATCH] fetch-pack: always allow fetching of literal SHA1s Jonathan Tan
2017-05-09 22:16 ` Jeff King [this message]
2017-05-10  4:22   ` Shawn Pearce
2017-05-10  4:33     ` Jeff King
2017-05-10  4:46       ` Mike Hommey
2017-05-10 17:50         ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2017-05-10 18:20           ` Jonathan Nieder
2017-05-10 18:48             ` Martin Fick
2017-05-10 18:54               ` Jonathan Nieder
2017-05-10  4:57       ` Shawn Pearce
2017-05-10 17:00       ` Jonathan Nieder
2017-05-10 18:55         ` Sebastian Schuberth
2017-05-11  9:59         ` Jeff King
2017-05-11 19:03           ` Jonathan Nieder
2017-05-11 21:04             ` Jeff King
2017-05-10 16:44 ` [PATCH v2] " Jonathan Tan
2017-05-10 18:01   ` Jonathan Nieder
2017-05-10 22:11 ` [PATCH v3] " Jonathan Tan
2017-05-10 23:22   ` Jonathan Nieder
2017-05-11  9:46   ` Jeff King
2017-05-11 17:51     ` Jonathan Tan
2017-05-11 20:52       ` Jeff King
2017-05-11 10:05   ` Jeff King
2017-05-11 17:00     ` Brandon Williams
2017-05-13  9:29       ` Jeff King
2017-05-11 21:14 ` [PATCH v4] " Jonathan Tan
2017-05-11 21:35   ` Jonathan Nieder
2017-05-11 21:59     ` Jeff King
2017-05-11 22:30 ` [PATCH v5] " Jonathan Tan
2017-05-11 22:46   ` Jonathan Nieder
2017-05-12  2:59     ` Jeff King
2017-05-12  6:01     ` Junio C Hamano
2017-05-12  7:59       ` Jeff King
2017-05-12  8:14         ` Jeff King
2017-05-12 18:00           ` Jonathan Tan
2017-05-13  8:30             ` Jeff King
2017-05-12 18:09         ` Jonathan Tan
2017-05-12 19:06           ` Jonathan Nieder
2017-05-12  3:06   ` Jeff King
2017-05-12 20:45 ` Jonathan Tan
2017-05-12 20:46 ` [PATCH v6] " Jonathan Tan
2017-05-12 22:28   ` Jonathan Nieder
2017-05-13  8:36   ` Jeff King
2017-05-15  1:26     ` Junio C Hamano
2017-05-15 17:32 ` [PATCH v7] " Jonathan Tan
2017-05-15 17:46   ` Jonathan Nieder
2017-05-15 22:10   ` Jeff King

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20170509221629.3z35qcz36oiix3kh@sigill.intra.peff.net \
    --to=peff@peff.net \
    --cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=jonathantanmy@google.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 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.