From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.4 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI, T_DKIM_INVALID shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id B0A311F404 for ; Sat, 21 Apr 2018 03:44:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752609AbeDUDnd (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 Apr 2018 23:43:33 -0400 Received: from mail-wr0-f196.google.com ([209.85.128.196]:45169 "EHLO mail-wr0-f196.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752552AbeDUDnc (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 Apr 2018 23:43:32 -0400 Received: by mail-wr0-f196.google.com with SMTP id u11-v6so27466986wri.12 for ; Fri, 20 Apr 2018 20:43:31 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=sender:from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id :user-agent:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=zwxfbGcib6BoSygbXQng21L4A8In5VPT+b/aczIk79Q=; b=eSMu00SGWqH1iz3eJWUgDywukxxvgk/IvGauGwnRMgQYjEqyjsprQGvTItT9vpE632 fUQYBO9j7hv4JRTsr56JeuuLDnKvPe8VAzotFXHRIkcqoE8DNkphh5roynPwz4nY2an1 2zYeAslsd2Bg4m0lAmE6wXzeRYGSbTVtbYv+I69T8vNL7yL2/U//Jt3YMhf7eKwlra7P H3zcUAliTj73aLiBq9Lvn+T+845Gl1jCkfdJrnwFkC+xca0ZloZ/dKjExeInT3V8+W5f OZWi6dupO6fXa95xkUZsHdBtBvrSkQ9sUAmlQKQm8woj/LX0c6SU5H3oSn+GPE01azXO AnVw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:from:to:cc:subject:references:date :in-reply-to:message-id:user-agent:mime-version :content-transfer-encoding; bh=zwxfbGcib6BoSygbXQng21L4A8In5VPT+b/aczIk79Q=; b=h2qaruhphJxOporJbnR030SDcMbthdA4kj80fDPH9a+lKwqQGipY06pZPKdZ7OlenQ d+YL2CRfoV9jVF+IGFc/6lN+FZ4jy2SpAIzPTI/WlAuTPfRGj5KrCnSlOFD9M2dJ2Fww Bs0P2eKKXEJW2g+ne/wK0SGfq3QHn4Zp3UhZv3dLINHprhqUnDgQDsQLQvUU46N82IiB KrelhDpPvlLSOVMapxOSLWhUTHTuom7IS8TWixp2LQplTTPo5NZSqLUeuavkWOEe5jEj 2Yqz+kGAaOK7/jtboxo7m6o+y5IrBpTQMYV1Ym+KCnLP+u/Ancndr9CjJ5qlJLZ1ywAN cqJQ== X-Gm-Message-State: ALQs6tD/WQdmyD0ZSzlXgFo3Fq9R6bQqjcFLQgcf0MMWLsJHEPbu7vvr DZf6f6YcJxXj0iOe2uZnfhwKFbSi X-Google-Smtp-Source: AIpwx4+kYi6CNb2E7fkCTsPGW0Ipq7pj8UzCzehWaPSIpmi/QkEmSFoF3G4Tg1nSBmfJZQraaxwiUg== X-Received: by 10.28.58.81 with SMTP id h78mr3226259wma.110.1524282210939; Fri, 20 Apr 2018 20:43:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (168.50.187.35.bc.googleusercontent.com. [35.187.50.168]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id m83sm3043745wma.17.2018.04.20.20.43.28 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Fri, 20 Apr 2018 20:43:28 -0700 (PDT) From: Junio C Hamano To: Martin =?utf-8?Q?=C3=85gren?= Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Johannes Schindelin , Isaac Chou , Jonathan Tan Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] fast-export: fix regression skipping some merge-commits References: <20180420221231.4131611-1-martin.agren@gmail.com> Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2018 12:43:27 +0900 In-Reply-To: <20180420221231.4131611-1-martin.agren@gmail.com> ("Martin =?utf-8?Q?=C3=85gren=22's?= message of "Sat, 21 Apr 2018 00:12:31 +0200") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.2.50 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Martin Ågren writes: > +test_expect_success 'merge commit gets exported with --import-marks' ' > + test_create_repo merging && > + ( > + cd merging && > + test_commit initial && > + git checkout -b topic && > + test_commit on-topic && > + git checkout master && > + test_commit on-master && > + test_tick && > + git merge --no-ff -m Yeah topic && > + > + echo ":1 $(git rev-parse HEAD^^)" >marks && > + git fast-export --import-marks=marks master >out && > + grep Yeah out > + ) > +' This test looks much better than the one in the earlier iteration, but I do not think the updated "fix" below is better. It might be just aesthetics and I suspect I won't find it as disturbing if we could push with object_array_push(commits, (struct object *)commit); or something that is more clearly symmetric to object_array_pop(). The "Queue again" comment is needed only because use of "add" highlights the lack of symmetry. With add_object_array(), it looks somewhat more odd than your previous peek it to check; if (it should not be molested) return; pop to mark it consumed; consume it; sequence, in which peek() and pop() were more obviously related operations on the same "array" object. And I do not think it is a good idea to introduce _push() only for symmetry (it would merely be a less capable version of add whose name is spelled differently). Hence my preference for peek-check-pop over pop-oops-push-again-but-push-spelled-as-add. Not worth a reroll, though. I just wanted to spread better design sense to contributors ;-) > test_done > diff --git a/builtin/fast-export.c b/builtin/fast-export.c > index 27b2cc138e..7b8dfc5af1 100644 > --- a/builtin/fast-export.c > +++ b/builtin/fast-export.c > @@ -651,8 +651,11 @@ static void handle_tail(struct object_array *commits, struct rev_info *revs, > struct commit *commit; > while (commits->nr) { > commit = (struct commit *)object_array_pop(commits); > - if (has_unshown_parent(commit)) > + if (has_unshown_parent(commit)) { > + /* Queue again, to be handled later */ > + add_object_array(&commit->object, NULL, commits); > return; > + } > handle_commit(commit, revs, paths_of_changed_objects); > } > }