From: "brian m. carlson" <sandals@crustytoothpaste.net>
To: Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>
Cc: Git List <git@vger.kernel.org>,
Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com>,
Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/24] SHA-256 test fixes, part 8
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2020 23:17:05 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200113231705.GU6570@camp.crustytoothpaste.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAPig+cReDPs8D1L3+Z4sMn__JuU-Ezs+fOSF00=_tNxa0DotFQ@mail.gmail.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1810 bytes --]
On 2020-01-13 at 13:41:44, Eric Sunshine wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 13, 2020 at 7:40 AM brian m. carlson
> <sandals@crustytoothpaste.net> wrote:
> > I suspect that t3404 also has a bug, since the object IDs that are
> > supposed to collide do not, according to my instrumentation of the test.
> > I'm unsure what the intended collision was and consequently haven't
> > fixed it. However, it does work with SHA-256 as it stands and is no
> > more or less functional than with SHA-1, so I've removed the
> > prerequisite.
>
> The test itself is fine, but it is one of those unfortunate cases of
> checking for absence of something (which is a wide net). As explained
> by the commit message[1] of the patch which added the test, the
> collision occurred only between short OID's. The patch[2] which fixed
> the problem did so by avoiding short OID's in the scripted
> implementation of `git rebase -i` (and also flipped the test from
> `text_expect_failure` to `test_expect_success`).
>
> The test, as currently implemented, is very much specific to SHA-1
> since the FAKE_COMMIT_MESSAGE="collide2 ac4f2ee" it uses only produces
> a collision with short OID's when SHA-1 is the hashing function, so
> the prerequisite is correct and serves as documentation (even if it
> doesn't affect the outcome of the test). Removing that prerequisite
> should only be done if the test is updated with a different
> FAKE_COMMIT_MESSAGE which causes a short OID collision when SHA-256 is
> used.
I'll take another look. When I looked at the output, it looked like
they didn't collide anymore even under SHA-1, but perhaps I instrumented
the test wrong and therefore got the wrong result. Thanks for double
checking.
--
brian m. carlson: Houston, Texas, US
OpenPGP: https://keybase.io/bk2204
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 868 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-01-13 23:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-01-13 12:38 [PATCH 00/24] SHA-256 test fixes, part 8 brian m. carlson
2020-01-13 12:38 ` [PATCH 01/24] t/lib-pack: support SHA-256 brian m. carlson
2020-01-13 12:38 ` [PATCH 02/24] t3206: make hash size independent brian m. carlson
2020-01-13 12:38 ` [PATCH 03/24] t3305: annotate with SHA1 prerequisite brian m. carlson
2020-01-13 12:38 ` [PATCH 04/24] t3308: make test work with SHA-256 brian m. carlson
2020-01-13 12:38 ` [PATCH 05/24] t3309: " brian m. carlson
2020-01-13 12:38 ` [PATCH 06/24] t3310: " brian m. carlson
2020-01-13 12:38 ` [PATCH 07/24] t3311: " brian m. carlson
2020-01-13 12:38 ` [PATCH 08/24] t3404: remove SHA1 prerequisite brian m. carlson
2020-01-13 12:38 ` [PATCH 09/24] t4013: make test hash independent brian m. carlson
2020-01-13 12:38 ` [PATCH 10/24] t4060: make test work with SHA-256 brian m. carlson
2020-01-13 12:38 ` [PATCH 11/24] t4211: make test hash independent brian m. carlson
2020-01-13 12:38 ` [PATCH 12/24] t5302: make hash size independent brian m. carlson
2020-01-13 12:38 ` [PATCH 13/24] t5309: make test hash independent brian m. carlson
2020-01-13 12:38 ` [PATCH 14/24] t5313: " brian m. carlson
2020-01-13 12:38 ` [PATCH 15/24] t5321: " brian m. carlson
2020-01-13 12:38 ` [PATCH 16/24] t5515: " brian m. carlson
2020-01-13 12:38 ` [PATCH 17/24] t5318: update for SHA-256 brian m. carlson
2020-01-13 13:50 ` Eric Sunshine
2020-01-13 23:14 ` brian m. carlson
2020-01-13 12:38 ` [PATCH 18/24] t5616: use correct filter syntax brian m. carlson
2020-01-13 20:28 ` [PATCH] t5616: make robust to delta base change Jonathan Tan
2020-01-13 23:11 ` brian m. carlson
2020-01-25 22:43 ` brian m. carlson
2020-01-13 12:38 ` [PATCH 19/24] t5607: make hash size independent brian m. carlson
2020-01-13 12:38 ` [PATCH 20/24] t5703: make test work with SHA-256 brian m. carlson
2020-01-13 13:53 ` Eric Sunshine
2020-01-13 23:15 ` brian m. carlson
2020-01-13 12:38 ` [PATCH 21/24] t5703: switch tests to use test_oid brian m. carlson
2020-01-13 12:38 ` [PATCH 22/24] t6000: abstract away SHA-1-specific constants brian m. carlson
2020-01-13 12:38 ` [PATCH 23/24] t6006: make hash size independent brian m. carlson
2020-01-13 12:38 ` [PATCH 24/24] t6024: update for SHA-256 brian m. carlson
2020-01-13 13:41 ` [PATCH 00/24] SHA-256 test fixes, part 8 Eric Sunshine
2020-01-13 23:17 ` brian m. carlson [this message]
2020-01-13 23:34 ` Eric Sunshine
2020-01-16 0:28 ` Johannes Schindelin
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=20200113231705.GU6570@camp.crustytoothpaste.net \
--to=sandals@crustytoothpaste.net \
--cc=Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=jonathantanmy@google.com \
--cc=sunshine@sunshineco.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.