cat-file: add a '--literally' option
v5 cover cat-file: add a '--literally' option
Based on Junios and Erics suggestion I have made various changes over the previous iteration of the patch[1].
Changes are :
* polishing of code and commit messages.
Thanks to Junio and Eric for their suggestions and guidance.
Reference:
[1]: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/265604
PATCH v5 1/2 sha1_file.c: support reading from a loose object of unknown type
Update sha1_loose_object_info() to optionally allow it to read from a loose object file of unknown/bogus type; as the function usually returns the type of the object it read in the form of enum for known types, add an optional "typename" field to receive the name of the type in textual form and a flag to indicate the reading of a loose object file of unknown/bogus type.
Add parse_sha1_header_extended() which acts as a wrapper around parse_sha1_header() allowing more information to be obtained.
Add unpack_sha1_header_to_strbuf() to unpack sha1 headers of unknown/corrupt objects which have a unknown sha1 header size to a strbuf structure. This was written by Junio C Hamano but tested by me.
--- cache.h | 2 ++ sha1_file.c | 110 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------- 2 files changed, 89 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)
cache.h +2 -0
@@ -830,6 +830,7 @@ extern int is_ntfs_dotgit(const char *name);/* object replacement */ #define LOOKUP_REPLACE_OBJECT 1 +#define LOOKUP_LITERALLY 2extern void *read_sha1_file_extended (const unsigned char *sha1,enum object_type *type,unsigned long *size,unsigned flag);static inline void *read_sha1_file (const unsigned char *sha1,enum object_type *type,unsigned long *size) {
@@ -1296,6 +1297,7 @@ struct object_info {unsigned long *sizep;unsigned long *disk_sizep;unsigned char *delta_base_sha1; +struct strbuf *typename;/* Response */ enum {
sha1_file.c +87 -23
181 lines not on this page · raw message
Signature · 1 line
2.3.1.170.g5319d60.dirty
Re: [PATCH v5 1/2] sha1_file.c: support reading from a loose object of unknown type
Quoted 16 lines · Karthik Nayak
sha1_file.c +16
-0+static int unpack_sha1_header_to_strbuf (git_zstream *stream,unsigned char *map, +unsigned long mapsize, +struct strbuf *header) +{ +unsigned char buffer[32 ], *cp; +unsigned long bufsiz =sizeof (buffer); +int status; + + status =unpack_sha1_header (stream, map, mapsize, buffer, bufsiz); + +if (status) { +strbuf_add (header, buffer, stream->next_out - buffer); +return status; + } + + do {
sha1_file.c int unpack_sha1_header(git_zstream *stream, unsigned char *map, unsigned long ma · line 1592
Quoted 10 lines
sha1_file.c +10
-0+ status =git_inflate (stream,0 ); +strbuf_add (header, buffer, stream->next_out - buffer); +for (cp = buffer; cp < stream->next_out; cp++) +if (!*cp) +/* Found the NUL at the end of the header */ +return 0 ; + stream->next_out = buffer; + stream->avail_out = bufsiz; + }while (status ==Z_OK ); +return -1 ;
A caller of unpack_sha1_header() gets the return from git_inflate(); I wonder if we should be returning "status" here for consistency, perhaps?
Re: [PATCH v5 1/2] sha1_file.c: support reading from a loose object of unknown type
Quoted 24 lines · Junio C Hamano
Quoted 22 lines · Karthik Nayak
sha1_file.c +22
-0+static int unpack_sha1_header_to_strbuf (git_zstream *stream,unsigned char *map, +unsigned long mapsize, +struct strbuf *header) +{ +unsigned char buffer[32 ], *cp; +unsigned long bufsiz =sizeof (buffer); +int status; + + status =unpack_sha1_header (stream, map, mapsize, buffer, bufsiz); + +if (status) { +strbuf_add (header, buffer, stream->next_out - buffer); +return status; + } + + do { + status = git_inflate(stream, 0); + strbuf_add(header, buffer, stream->next_out - buffer); + for (cp = buffer; cp < stream->next_out; cp++) + if (!*cp) + /* Found the NUL at the end of the header */ + return 0;
Quoted 9 lines
sha1_file.c int unpack_sha1_header(git_zstream *stream, unsigned char *map, unsigned long ma · line 1592
Quoted 4 lines
sha1_file.c +4
-0+ stream->next_out = buffer; + stream->avail_out = bufsiz; + }while (status ==Z_OK ); +return -1 ;A caller of
unpack_sha1_header()gets the return fromgit_inflate(); I wonder if we should be returning "status" here for consistency, perhaps?
Although the caller only checks for negative values for failure. For consistency it would be better to return status as unpack_sha1_header() does.
Re: [PATCH v5 1/2] sha1_file.c: support reading from a loose object of unknown type
In reply to Karthik Nayaksha1_file.c static int sha1_loose_object_info(const unsigned char *sha1, · line 2626
Quoted 13 lines · Karthik Nayak
sha1_file.c +13
-0+if ((flags &LOOKUP_LITERALLY )) { +if (unpack_sha1_header_to_strbuf (&stream, map, mapsize, &hdrbuf) <0 ) + status =error ("unable to unpack %s header with --literally" , +sha1_to_hex (sha1)); +else if ((status =parse_sha1_header_extended (hdrbuf.buf, oi, flags)) <0 ) + status =error ("unable to parse %s header" ,sha1_to_hex (sha1)); + }else { +if (unpack_sha1_header (&stream, map, mapsize, hdr,sizeof (hdr)) <0 ) + status =error ("unable to unpack %s header" , +sha1_to_hex (sha1)); +else if ((status =parse_sha1_header_extended (hdr, oi, flags)) <0 ) + status =error ("unable to parse %s header" ,sha1_to_hex (sha1)); + }
I wonder if you can further reduce an unnecessary duplication in the two "else if" clauses in the above, and if the result becomes easier to read and maintain. Perhaps
if (((flags & LOOKUP_LITERALLY)
? unpack_sha1_header_to_strbuf(...)
: unpack_sha1_header(...)) < 0)
status = error(...);
else if ((status = parse_sha1_header_extended(...)) < 0)
status = error(...);or even
status = 0;
if (flags & LOOKUP_LITERALLY) {
if (unpack_sha1_header_to_strbuf(...) < 0)
status = error(...);
} else {
if (unpack_sha1_header(...) < 0)
status = error(...);
}
if (!status) {
if (status = parse(...)) < 0)
status = error(...);
}although I think the latter might be a bit harder to read.
Re: [PATCH v5 1/2] sha1_file.c: support reading from a loose object of unknown type
Quoted 42 lines · Junio C Hamano
sha1_file.c static int sha1_loose_object_info(const unsigned char *sha1, · line 2626
Quoted 13 lines · Karthik Nayak
sha1_file.c +13
-0+if ((flags &LOOKUP_LITERALLY )) { +if (unpack_sha1_header_to_strbuf (&stream, map, mapsize, &hdrbuf) <0 ) + status =error ("unable to unpack %s header with --literally" , +sha1_to_hex (sha1)); +else if ((status =parse_sha1_header_extended (hdrbuf.buf, oi, flags)) <0 ) + status =error ("unable to parse %s header" ,sha1_to_hex (sha1)); + }else { +if (unpack_sha1_header (&stream, map, mapsize, hdr,sizeof (hdr)) <0 ) + status =error ("unable to unpack %s header" , +sha1_to_hex (sha1)); +else if ((status =parse_sha1_header_extended (hdr, oi, flags)) <0 ) + status =error ("unable to parse %s header" ,sha1_to_hex (sha1)); + }I wonder if you can further reduce an unnecessary duplication in the two "else if" clauses in the above, and if the result becomes easier to read and maintain. Perhaps
if (((flags & LOOKUP_LITERALLY) ? unpack_sha1_header_to_strbuf(...) : unpack_sha1_header(...)) < 0) status = error(...); else if ((status = parse_sha1_header_extended(...)) < 0) status = error(...);or even
status = 0; if (flags & LOOKUP_LITERALLY) { if (unpack_sha1_header_to_strbuf(...) < 0) status = error(...); } else { if (unpack_sha1_header(...) < 0) status = error(...); } if (!status) { if (status = parse(...)) < 0) status = error(...); }
Quoted 2 lines
although I think the latter might be a bit harder to read.
I hope you meant the former. The latter to me seems simpler as its a simple if else statement whereas the former has a ternary operator with function calls. I did think about this when writing the code, the problem is when flag == LOOKUP_LITERALLY, parse_sha1_header_extended() takes 'hdrbuf.buf' as first argument where as when flag != LOOKUP_LITERALLY, it takes 'hdr' as an argument. We could do this
status = 0;
char * hdrp;
if (flags & LOOKUP_LITERALLY) {
if (unpack_sha1_header_to_strbuf(...) < 0)
status = error(...);
hdrp = hdrbuf.buf;
} else {
if (unpack_sha1_header(...) < 0)
status = error(...);
hdrp = hdr;
}
if (!status)
if (status = parse(hdrp, ...)) < 0)
status = error(...);
}But I think it just introduces another variable to keep track of, which I rather not have.
Re: [PATCH v5 1/2] sha1_file.c: support reading from a loose object of unknown type
Quoted 1 line · karthik nayak
I hope you meant the former.
I did mean the latter, which spends more lines without much information (i.e. only closing braces), only to reduce the duplication of two simple lines.
But you are right, I did miss the distinction between hdrbuf.buf and hdr, so they are not identically duplicated.
PATCH v5 2/2 cat-file: teach cat-file a '--literally' option
In reply to karthik nayakCurrently 'git cat-file' throws an error while trying to print the type or size of a broken/corrupt object which is created using 'git hash-object --literally'. This is because these objects are usually of unknown types.
Teach git cat-file a '--literally' option where it prints the type or size of a broken/corrupt object without throwing an error.
Modify '-t' and '-s' options to call sha1_object_info_extended() directly to support the '--literally' option.
--- builtin/cat-file.c | 41 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--------- 1 file changed, 32 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
builtin/cat-file.c +32 -9
@@ -9,13 +9,20 @@#include "userdiff.h" #include "streaming.h" -static int cat_one_file (int opt,const char *exp_type,const char *obj_name) +static int cat_one_file (int opt,const char *exp_type,const char *obj_name, +int literally) {unsigned char sha1[20 ];enum object_type type;char *buf;unsigned long size;struct object_context obj_context; +struct object_info oi = {NULL }; +struct strbuf sb =STRBUF_INIT ; +unsigned flags =LOOKUP_REPLACE_OBJECT ; + +if (literally) + flags |=LOOKUP_LITERALLY ;if (get_sha1_with_context (obj_name,0 , sha1, &obj_context))die ("Not a valid object name %s" , obj_name);
@@ -23,16 +30,24 @@ static int cat_one_file(int opt, const char *exp_type, const char *obj_name) buf =NULL ;switch (opt) {case 't' : - type =sha1_object_info (sha1,NULL ); -if (type >0 ) { -printf ("%s\n" ,typename (type)); + oi.typep = &type; + oi.typename = &sb; +if (sha1_object_info_extended (sha1, &oi, flags) <0 ) +die ("git cat-file: could not get object info" ); +if (sb.len) { +printf ("%s\n" , sb.buf); +strbuf_release (&sb);return 0 ; }break ;case 's' : - type =sha1_object_info (sha1, &size); -if (type >0 ) { + oi.typep = &type; + oi.typename = &sb; + oi.sizep = &size; +if (sha1_object_info_extended (sha1, &oi, flags) <0 ) +die ("git cat-file: could not get object info" ); +if (sb.len) {printf ("%lu\n" , size);return 0 ; }
@@ -323,7 +338,7 @@ static int batch_objects(struct batch_options *opt) }static const char *const cat_file_usage[] = { -N_ ("git cat-file (-t | -s | -e | -p | <type> | --textconv) <object>" ), +N_ ("git cat-file (-t [--literally]|-s [--literally]|-e|-p|<type>|--textconv) <object>" ),N_ ("git cat-file (--batch | --batch-check) < <list-of-objects>" ),NULL };
@@ -359,6 +374,7 @@ int cmd_cat_file(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix)int opt =0 ;const char *exp_type =NULL , *obj_name =NULL ;struct batch_options batch = {0 }; +int literally =0 ;const struct option options[] = {OPT_GROUP (N_ ("<type> can be one of: blob, tree, commit, tag" )),
@@ -369,6 +385,8 @@ int cmd_cat_file(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix)OPT_SET_INT ('p' ,NULL , &opt,N_ ("pretty-print object's content" ),'p' ),OPT_SET_INT (0 ,"textconv" , &opt,N_ ("for blob objects, run textconv on object's content" ),'c' ), +OPT_BOOL (0 ,"literally" , &literally, +N_ ("get information about corrupt objects for debugging Git" )), { OPTION_CALLBACK, 0, "batch", &batch, "format",N_ ("show info and content of objects fed from the standard input" ), PARSE_OPT_OPTARG, batch_option_callback },
@@ -380,7 +398,7 @@ int cmd_cat_file(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix)git_config (git_cat_file_config,NULL ); -if (argc !=3 && argc !=2 ) +if (argc <2 || argc >4 )usage_with_options (cat_file_usage, options); argc =parse_options (argc, argv, prefix, options, cat_file_usage,0 );
@@ -405,5 +423,10 @@ int cmd_cat_file(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix)if (batch.enabled)return batch_objects (&batch); -return cat_one_file (opt, exp_type, obj_name); +if (literally && (opt =='t' || opt =='s' )) +return cat_one_file (opt, exp_type, obj_name, literally); +else if (literally) +die ("git cat-file --literally: use with -s or -t" ); + +return cat_one_file (opt, exp_type, obj_name, literally); }
Signature · 1 line
2.3.1.170.g5319d60.dirty
Re: [PATCH v5 2/2] cat-file: teach cat-file a '--literally' option
Quoted 21 lines · Karthik Nayak
Currently 'git cat-file' throws an error while trying to print the type or size of a broken/corrupt object which is created using 'git hash-object --literally'. This is because these objects are usually of unknown types.
Teach git cat-file a '--literally' option where it prints the type or size of a broken/corrupt object without throwing an error.
Modify '-t' and '-s' options to call
sha1_object_info_extended()directly to support the '--literally' option.Helped-by Junio C Hamano <[email protected]>Helped-by Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshinecoSigned-off-by Karthik Nayak <[email protected]>---
builtin/cat-file.c +0
-0
builtin/cat-file.c int cmd_cat_file(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix) · line 431
Quoted 10 lines
builtin/cat-file.c +6
-1@@ -405,5 +423,10 @@ int cmd_cat_file(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix)if (batch.enabled)return batch_objects (&batch); -return cat_one_file (opt, exp_type, obj_name); +if (literally && (opt =='t' || opt =='s' )) +return cat_one_file (opt, exp_type, obj_name, literally); +else if (literally) +die ("git cat-file --literally: use with -s or -t" ); + +return cat_one_file (opt, exp_type, obj_name, literally);
Although I haven't read the patch closely yet, this unnecessarily complex logic caught my eye as I was scanning the changes. If you check for the illegal option combination first, then you can coalesce the two identical cat_one_file() invocations, and this entire hunk reduces to the more readable:
if (literally && opt != 't' && opt != 's')
die("git cat-file --literally: use with -s or -t");
return cat_one_file(opt, exp_type, obj_name, literally);Quoted 3 lines
builtin/cat-file.c +0
-1} --2.3.1.170.g5319d60.dirty
Re: [PATCH v5 2/2] cat-file: teach cat-file a '--literally' option
Quoted 39 lines · Eric Sunshine
Quoted 21 lines · Karthik Nayak
Currently 'git cat-file' throws an error while trying to print the type or size of a broken/corrupt object which is created using 'git hash-object --literally'. This is because these objects are usually of unknown types.
Teach git cat-file a '--literally' option where it prints the type or size of a broken/corrupt object without throwing an error.
Modify '-t' and '-s' options to call
sha1_object_info_extended()directly to support the '--literally' option.Helped-by Junio C Hamano <[email protected]>Helped-by Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshinecoSigned-off-by Karthik Nayak <[email protected]>---
builtin/cat-file.c +0
-0builtin/cat-file.c int cmd_cat_file(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix) · line 431
Quoted 10 lines
builtin/cat-file.c +6
-1@@ -405,5 +423,10 @@ int cmd_cat_file(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix)if (batch.enabled)return batch_objects (&batch); -return cat_one_file (opt, exp_type, obj_name); +if (literally && (opt =='t' || opt =='s' )) +return cat_one_file (opt, exp_type, obj_name, literally); +else if (literally) +die ("git cat-file --literally: use with -s or -t" ); + +return cat_one_file (opt, exp_type, obj_name, literally);Although I haven't read the patch closely yet, this unnecessarily complex logic caught my eye as I was scanning the changes. If you check for the illegal option combination first, then you can coalesce the two identical
cat_one_file()invocations, and this entire hunk reduces to the more readable:
Quoted 8 lines
if (literally && opt != 't' && opt != 's') die("git cat-file --literally: use with -s or -t"); return cat_one_file(opt, exp_type, obj_name, literally);Quoted 3 lines
builtin/cat-file.c +0
-1} --2.3.1.170.g5319d60.dirty
Hey Eric,
Yes that could be done.
When small fixes like these need to be done, Is it sufficient to reply to this mail with the fixed patch, or should I resend the whole patch series?
Thanks,
Karthik