From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail.manjaro.org (mail.manjaro.org [116.203.91.91]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 455DA15A4BB for ; Thu, 18 Apr 2024 09:12:28 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=116.203.91.91 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1713431550; cv=none; b=k22/xbA6ekI8rXNrIRNuGmo9Ksda2/okLlah0smJ9rGP/KxCDmTafNulBe0ANTldignEjiDtXLneJmzUUTXXtycnY6c5EVqMuVbVd8vTJxNTn9p2yqsq8ICViJe6agaubJStM/i65niHy2AUAFYVfZVyyy7IePBC6j6tpJVHp4Y= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1713431550; c=relaxed/simple; bh=8d984NX80g8XUXXbXoqeW6XmaW/ffS1SBCi9sXAq+Lo=; h=MIME-Version:Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References: Message-ID:Content-Type; b=fZLwMj//5tJsm2iLGqdwo0zfiFTg0LvR1po5zt6IVIy5p7Rm9cwLKm1NlA0qGFAmjcPBDdqbfQpBbi6Pj92jqrDo2Vg5i9RIGJ/BI54TAhpMN2jqSeHH4A1JH26OYUl2xieFhsfq8SygYAleRwJndGD4I7y21xRzwX5hZ3yvR0w= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=manjaro.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=manjaro.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=manjaro.org header.i=@manjaro.org header.b=pbUb5cp2; arc=none smtp.client-ip=116.203.91.91 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=manjaro.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=manjaro.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=manjaro.org header.i=@manjaro.org header.b="pbUb5cp2" Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=manjaro.org; s=2021; t=1713431546; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=Og6DdWkMURLktnIpRxdHX39dNl4Z7VyhcRpLcF+mkSk=; b=pbUb5cp2EqSJN9ErwKcqao2AAAAHknuRgMacTkqJ5RNn6WV3W0vbj5hPgLkJno/q9JsAM1 Af5EaZB7+z4f7EMxlT2yoEF4Aoo5N1Vhg3ap3lxJzwDWri0U7tg8pclmHr3/S/z4GqOdEL A7YiWdisX0AxdZ5tIfMu/wvhIoGxv0FudanmL1jjh6PuYlsz+ziqY3vsWI/+WlMnhqRcLB ZgF7n5zCKbgYf6OLH1MQMV272954BQqMA5G19tHNGSF6KJLPU2rKbEVY6IWkEh6YsPl7qx mNO7PCqbHGzmlFSIZR7BKboKHtEJ5xJ/pqDP6TPNvZrThq9u4diienP4zkg/TQ== Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2024 11:12:26 +0200 From: Dragan Simic To: Patrick Steinhardt Cc: git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] format-patch: fix a bug in option exclusivity and add a test to t4014 In-Reply-To: <47ac35d45693aa5b9fa061e85da6e176@manjaro.org> References: <47ac35d45693aa5b9fa061e85da6e176@manjaro.org> Message-ID: X-Sender: dsimic@manjaro.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Authentication-Results: ORIGINATING; auth=pass smtp.auth=dsimic@manjaro.org smtp.mailfrom=dsimic@manjaro.org Hello Patrick, On 2024-04-17 08:56, Dragan Simic wrote: > On 2024-04-17 08:27, Patrick Steinhardt wrote: >> On Wed, Apr 17, 2024 at 05:32:42AM +0200, Dragan Simic wrote: >>> Fix a bug that allows --rfc and -k options to be specified together >>> when >>> executing "git format-patch". This bug was introduced back in the >>> commit >>> e0d7db7423a9 ("format-patch: --rfc honors what --subject-prefix >>> sets"), >>> about eight months ago, but it has remained undetected so far, >>> presumably >>> because of no associated test coverage. >>> >>> Add a new test to the t4014 that covers the mutual exclusivity of the >>> --rfc >>> and -k command-line options for "git format-patch", for future >>> coverage. >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Dragan Simic >>> --- >>> builtin/log.c | 5 ++++- >>> t/t4014-format-patch.sh | 4 ++++ >>> 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >>> >>> diff --git a/builtin/log.c b/builtin/log.c >>> index c0a8bb95e983..e5a238f1cf2c 100644 >>> --- a/builtin/log.c >>> +++ b/builtin/log.c >>> @@ -2050,8 +2050,11 @@ int cmd_format_patch(int argc, const char >>> **argv, const char *prefix) >>> if (cover_from_description_arg) >>> cover_from_description_mode = >>> parse_cover_from_description(cover_from_description_arg); >>> >>> - if (rfc) >>> + /* Also mark the subject prefix as modified, for later checks */ >>> + if (rfc) { >>> strbuf_insertstr(&sprefix, 0, "RFC "); >>> + subject_prefix = 1; >>> + } >> >> As an alternative fix, can we drop `subject_prefix` and replace it >> with >> `sprefix.len` instead? It seems to merely be a proxy value for that >> anyway, and if we didn't have that variable then the bug would not >> have >> been possible to begin with. > > Thanks for your feedback! > > I'll think about it, and I'll come back a bit later with an update. Unfortunately, we can't use sprefix.len instead, because it can still be zero even if the --subject-prefix option was present, more specifically if we receive --subject-prefix="" on the command line. The checks that use subject_prefix need to check if --subject-prefix was specified at all as an option, instead of checking if the actual subject prefix is of non-zero length. As you already noted, if sprefix.len was used instead of the separate subject_prefix variable, the '--rfc -k' bug wouldn't be possible, but the new '--subject-prefix="" -k' bug would be possible instead. >>> if (reroll_count) { >>> strbuf_addf(&sprefix, " v%s", reroll_count); >>> diff --git a/t/t4014-format-patch.sh b/t/t4014-format-patch.sh >>> index e37a1411ee24..e22c4ac34e6e 100755 >>> --- a/t/t4014-format-patch.sh >>> +++ b/t/t4014-format-patch.sh >>> @@ -1397,6 +1397,10 @@ test_expect_success '--rfc is argument order >>> independent' ' >>> test_cmp expect actual >>> ' >>> >>> +test_expect_success '--rfc and -k cannot be used together' ' >>> + test_must_fail git format-patch -1 --stdout --rfc -k >patch >>> +' >>> + >>> test_expect_success '--from=ident notices bogus ident' ' >>> test_must_fail git format-patch -1 --stdout --from=foo >patch >>> '