From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3FF2EC4338F for ; Wed, 18 Aug 2021 18:30:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E3B6610A6 for ; Wed, 18 Aug 2021 18:30:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230021AbhHRSbU (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Aug 2021 14:31:20 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp20.pobox.com ([173.228.157.52]:60387 "EHLO pb-smtp20.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229448AbhHRSbT (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Aug 2021 14:31:19 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp20.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 313C014F99D; Wed, 18 Aug 2021 14:30:44 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=281J+tWt3lyJQOQHAcJH8B7Y84uq8jA58nCpQl wBnbE=; b=d3ZGLpeJ7sGszt64gT7x+IMoZgXlDxlLkVK1uKKExDuvVOM1TTp5Uh 8cHcz3hNczD/7QgVK8D9J0Iey7j1zt2UJCDG5hJMKoLtHJcA0DOg5Q2sLSdxWpad Mg0UuRWkkKi5DLfIzbUvTcRh3LPnXFmPOeSoobqedEsErJRV8tQ64= Received: from pb-smtp20.sea.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2993114F99C; Wed, 18 Aug 2021 14:30:44 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [34.74.116.162]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 663DE14F99B; Wed, 18 Aug 2021 14:30:41 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Han-Wen Nienhuys Cc: Han-Wen Nienhuys via GitGitGadget , git@vger.kernel.org, Jonathan Tan , =?utf-8?B?w4Z2YXIgQXJuZmrDtnLDsA==?= Bjarmason , Han-Wen Nienhuys Subject: Re: [PATCH] fixup! propagate errno from failing read References: Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2021 11:30:39 -0700 In-Reply-To: (Han-Wen Nienhuys's message of "Wed, 18 Aug 2021 11:00:36 +0200") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 6474E2A4-0052-11EC-89C5-D5C30F5B5667-77302942!pb-smtp20.pobox.com Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Han-Wen Nienhuys writes: >> I think the convention to assign errno to myerr in this codepath >> originates in a0731250 (refs: explicitly return failure_errno from >> parse_loose_ref_contents, 2021-07-20), and it forgot the part of the >> code being fixed with this patch. The commit being fixed is already >> is in 'next' as part of the hn/refs-errno-cleanup topic. >> >> Usually, a flaw in a topic that is already in 'next' is corrected by >> a follow-up patch, but then they won't say "fixup!" (none of our >> bugfix patches do). But a post-release is a special time, as we >> will soon be rewinding 'next', restarting it from the latest release >> and we have a choice to tentatively eject a topic, fix it up or >> even replace it, before merging the corrected topic to 'next'. >> >> Do you mean that you want me to squash this change into that commit >> before the topic graduates to 'master' during the new development >> cycle? If so please be a bit more explicit next time. Using the >> title of the commit after "fixup!" would be a good starting point. > > The problem fixed here affects anyone who uses git-repo (ie. does > Android development) and runs "git-branch -m", which is a large group > of people, so I think it should not be allowed to get into a release. OK. The problem already is in 'next' and we want to make sure it won't graduate to 'master' for the next release as-is. I agree with that ;-) > So it could be squashed into commit a0731250, or put on top of next as > a separate commit (probably with 'fixup!' removed). I'd try the former first and will fall back on the latter, then. > Note that, even though commit a0731250 originates from a branch called > "hn/XXX" and has me as Author, the BUG() call causing the crash was > actually introduced by AEvar when he reworked the series. Yup, I see his Sob after yours and it is quite understandable if a new bug was introduced by his changes. It also would be understandable if his change was only to add a call to BUG() in order to assert that the original patch used myerr consistently, and it uncovered a bug in the original version he took from you. I do not care too much about how exactly the bug was introduced and uncovered---it matters more that the end result has one fewer bug thanks to the team effort.