Git Mailing List Archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
To: "brian m. carlson" <sandals@crustytoothpaste.net>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>,
	Adam Majer <adamm@zombino.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] upload-pack: advertise capabilities when cloning empty repos
Date: Mon, 1 May 2023 18:40:38 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20230501224038.GA1174291@coredump.intra.peff.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20230501170018.1410567-2-sandals@crustytoothpaste.net>

On Mon, May 01, 2023 at 05:00:18PM +0000, brian m. carlson wrote:

> There is one minor issue to fix, though.  When we call send_ref with
> namespaces, we would return NULL with the capabilities entry, which
> would cause a crash.  Instead, let's make sure we don't try to strip the
> namespace if we're using our special capabilities entry.

Thanks, this hunk:

> @@ -1212,7 +1213,8 @@ static int send_ref(const char *refname, const struct object_id *oid,
>  	static const char *capabilities = "multi_ack thin-pack side-band"
>  		" side-band-64k ofs-delta shallow deepen-since deepen-not"
>  		" deepen-relative no-progress include-tag multi_ack_detailed";
> -	const char *refname_nons = strip_namespace(refname);
> +	const char *refname_nons = !strcmp(refname, "capabilities^{}") ?
> +				   refname : strip_namespace(refname);
>  	struct object_id peeled;
>  	struct upload_pack_data *data = cb_data;

looks much better than sticking it in strip_namespace() as I did
earlier. I did wonder about refactoring further:

diff --git a/upload-pack.c b/upload-pack.c
index d7b31d0527..e1d75d7c3c 100644
--- a/upload-pack.c
+++ b/upload-pack.c
@@ -1207,19 +1207,17 @@ static void format_session_id(struct strbuf *buf, struct upload_pack_data *d) {
 		strbuf_addf(buf, " session-id=%s", trace2_session_id());
 }
 
-static int send_ref(const char *refname, const struct object_id *oid,
-		    int flag UNUSED, void *cb_data)
+static void write_v0_ref(struct upload_pack_data *data,
+			 const char *refname, const char *refname_nons,
+			 const struct object_id *oid)
 {
 	static const char *capabilities = "multi_ack thin-pack side-band"
 		" side-band-64k ofs-delta shallow deepen-since deepen-not"
 		" deepen-relative no-progress include-tag multi_ack_detailed";
-	const char *refname_nons = !strcmp(refname, "capabilities^{}") ?
-				   refname : strip_namespace(refname);
 	struct object_id peeled;
-	struct upload_pack_data *data = cb_data;
 
 	if (mark_our_ref(refname_nons, refname, oid, &data->hidden_refs))
-		return 0;
+		return;
 
 	if (capabilities) {
 		struct strbuf symref_info = STRBUF_INIT;
@@ -1249,6 +1247,12 @@ static int send_ref(const char *refname, const struct object_id *oid,
 	capabilities = NULL;
 	if (!peel_iterated_oid(oid, &peeled))
 		packet_fwrite_fmt(stdout, "%s %s^{}\n", oid_to_hex(&peeled), refname_nons);
+}
+
+static int send_ref(const char *refname, const struct object_id *oid,
+		    int flag UNUSED, void *cb_data)
+{
+	write_v0_ref(cb_data, refname, strip_namespace(refname), oid);
 	return 0;
 }
 
@@ -1382,8 +1386,10 @@ void upload_pack(const int advertise_refs, const int stateless_rpc,
 			data.no_done = 1;
 		head_ref_namespaced(send_ref, &data);
 		for_each_namespaced_ref(send_ref, &data);
-		if (!data.sent_capabilities)
-			send_ref("capabilities^{}", null_oid(), 0, &data);
+		if (!data.sent_capabilities) {
+			const char *ref = "capabilities^{}";
+			write_v0_ref(&data, ref, ref, null_oid());
+		}
 		/*
 		 * fflush stdout before calling advertise_shallow_grafts because send_ref
 		 * uses stdio.

which avoids doing an extra strcmp() on every ref. But probably it is
not that big a deal either way.

> Add several sets of tests for HTTP as well as for local clones.

This part puzzled me a bit. There's a local test in t5700, which is
good. But it also gets HTTP tests. What do they offer versus the ones in
t5551 (or vice versa)?

-Peff

  reply	other threads:[~2023-05-01 22:40 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 58+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-04-05 10:28 git clone of empty repositories doesn't preserve hash Adam Majer
2023-04-05 19:04 ` Junio C Hamano
2023-04-05 19:47   ` Adam Majer
2023-04-05 20:01     ` Jeff King
2023-04-05 20:40       ` Junio C Hamano
2023-04-05 21:15         ` Junio C Hamano
2023-04-05 21:26           ` Jeff King
2023-04-05 22:48           ` brian m. carlson
2023-04-06 13:11           ` Adam Majer
2023-04-25 21:35           ` brian m. carlson
2023-04-25 22:24             ` Junio C Hamano
2023-04-25 23:12             ` Junio C Hamano
2023-04-26  0:20               ` brian m. carlson
2023-04-26 11:25                 ` Jeff King
2023-04-26 15:08                   ` Junio C Hamano
2023-04-26 15:13                     ` [PATCH] doc: GIT_DEFAULT_HASH is and will be ignored during "clone" Junio C Hamano
2023-04-26 21:06                       ` brian m. carlson
2023-04-27  4:46                     ` git clone of empty repositories doesn't preserve hash Jeff King
2023-04-26 10:51               ` Jeff King
2023-04-26 15:42                 ` Junio C Hamano
2023-04-26 20:40                 ` brian m. carlson
2023-04-26 20:53                   ` [PATCH 0/2] Fix empty SHA-256 clones with v0 and v1 brian m. carlson
2023-04-26 20:53                     ` [PATCH 1/2] http: advertise capabilities when cloning empty repos brian m. carlson
2023-04-26 21:14                       ` Junio C Hamano
2023-04-26 21:28                         ` brian m. carlson
2023-04-27  5:00                           ` Jeff King
2023-04-27  5:30                       ` Jeff King
2023-04-27 20:40                         ` Junio C Hamano
2023-04-26 20:53                     ` [PATCH 2/2] Honor GIT_DEFAULT_HASH for empty clones without remote algo brian m. carlson
2023-04-26 21:18                       ` Junio C Hamano
2023-04-26 21:33                       ` Junio C Hamano
2023-04-27  5:43                         ` Jeff King
2023-05-02 23:46                           ` Is GIT_DEFAULT_HASH flawed? Felipe Contreras
2023-05-03  9:03                             ` Adam Majer
2023-05-03 15:44                               ` Felipe Contreras
2023-05-03 17:21                                 ` Adam Majer
2023-05-08  0:34                                   ` Felipe Contreras
2023-05-03  9:09                             ` demerphq
2023-05-03 18:20                               ` Felipe Contreras
2023-05-03 22:54                             ` brian m. carlson
2023-05-08  2:00                               ` Felipe Contreras
2023-05-08 21:38                                 ` brian m. carlson
2023-05-09 10:32                                   ` Oswald Buddenhagen
2023-05-09 16:47                                     ` Junio C Hamano
2023-04-26 21:12                     ` [PATCH 0/2] Fix empty SHA-256 clones with v0 and v1 Junio C Hamano
2023-04-27  4:56                   ` git clone of empty repositories doesn't preserve hash Jeff King
2023-05-01 17:00                   ` [PATCH v2 0/1] Fix empty SHA-256 clones with v0 and v1 brian m. carlson
2023-05-01 17:00                     ` [PATCH v2 1/1] upload-pack: advertise capabilities when cloning empty repos brian m. carlson
2023-05-01 22:40                       ` Jeff King [this message]
2023-05-01 22:51                         ` Junio C Hamano
2023-05-01 17:37                     ` [PATCH v2 0/1] Fix empty SHA-256 clones with v0 and v1 Junio C Hamano
2023-05-17 19:24                   ` [PATCH v3 " brian m. carlson
2023-05-17 19:24                     ` [PATCH v3 1/1] upload-pack: advertise capabilities when cloning empty repos brian m. carlson
2023-05-17 21:48                     ` [PATCH v3 0/1] Fix empty SHA-256 clones with v0 and v1 Junio C Hamano
2023-05-17 22:28                       ` brian m. carlson
2023-05-18 18:28                     ` Jeff King
2023-05-19 15:32                       ` brian m. carlson
2023-04-05 21:23         ` git clone of empty repositories doesn't preserve hash 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=20230501224038.GA1174291@coredump.intra.peff.net \
    --to=peff@peff.net \
    --cc=adamm@zombino.com \
    --cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=gitster@pobox.com \
    --cc=sandals@crustytoothpaste.net \
    /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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).