2023-04-23 04:17:23 +08:00
|
|
|
#include "git-compat-util.h"
|
2023-02-24 08:09:27 +08:00
|
|
|
#include "hex.h"
|
2023-04-23 04:17:15 +08:00
|
|
|
#include "match-trees.h"
|
2023-05-16 14:34:06 +08:00
|
|
|
#include "strbuf.h"
|
2007-02-16 08:32:45 +08:00
|
|
|
#include "tree.h"
|
|
|
|
#include "tree-walk.h"
|
2023-05-16 14:34:06 +08:00
|
|
|
#include "object-store-ll.h"
|
2007-02-16 08:32:45 +08:00
|
|
|
|
2019-01-24 21:11:34 +08:00
|
|
|
static int score_missing(unsigned mode)
|
2007-02-16 08:32:45 +08:00
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
int score;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if (S_ISDIR(mode))
|
|
|
|
score = -1000;
|
|
|
|
else if (S_ISLNK(mode))
|
|
|
|
score = -500;
|
|
|
|
else
|
|
|
|
score = -50;
|
|
|
|
return score;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2019-01-24 21:11:34 +08:00
|
|
|
static int score_differs(unsigned mode1, unsigned mode2)
|
2007-02-16 08:32:45 +08:00
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
int score;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if (S_ISDIR(mode1) != S_ISDIR(mode2))
|
|
|
|
score = -100;
|
|
|
|
else if (S_ISLNK(mode1) != S_ISLNK(mode2))
|
|
|
|
score = -50;
|
|
|
|
else
|
|
|
|
score = -5;
|
|
|
|
return score;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2019-01-24 21:11:34 +08:00
|
|
|
static int score_matches(unsigned mode1, unsigned mode2)
|
2007-02-16 08:32:45 +08:00
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
int score;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/* Heh, we found SHA-1 collisions between different kind of objects */
|
|
|
|
if (S_ISDIR(mode1) != S_ISDIR(mode2))
|
|
|
|
score = -100;
|
|
|
|
else if (S_ISLNK(mode1) != S_ISLNK(mode2))
|
|
|
|
score = -50;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
else if (S_ISDIR(mode1))
|
|
|
|
score = 1000;
|
|
|
|
else if (S_ISLNK(mode1))
|
|
|
|
score = 500;
|
|
|
|
else
|
|
|
|
score = 250;
|
|
|
|
return score;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2013-06-14 02:19:28 +08:00
|
|
|
static void *fill_tree_desc_strict(struct tree_desc *desc,
|
2016-04-18 07:10:41 +08:00
|
|
|
const struct object_id *hash)
|
2013-06-14 02:19:28 +08:00
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
void *buffer;
|
|
|
|
enum object_type type;
|
|
|
|
unsigned long size;
|
|
|
|
|
2023-03-28 21:58:50 +08:00
|
|
|
buffer = repo_read_object_file(the_repository, hash, &type, &size);
|
2013-06-14 02:19:28 +08:00
|
|
|
if (!buffer)
|
2016-04-18 07:10:41 +08:00
|
|
|
die("unable to read tree (%s)", oid_to_hex(hash));
|
2013-06-14 02:19:28 +08:00
|
|
|
if (type != OBJ_TREE)
|
2016-04-18 07:10:41 +08:00
|
|
|
die("%s is not a tree", oid_to_hex(hash));
|
2023-10-02 10:40:28 +08:00
|
|
|
init_tree_desc(desc, hash, buffer, size);
|
2013-06-14 02:19:28 +08:00
|
|
|
return buffer;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2013-03-25 06:46:28 +08:00
|
|
|
static int base_name_entries_compare(const struct name_entry *a,
|
|
|
|
const struct name_entry *b)
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
return base_name_compare(a->path, tree_entry_len(a), a->mode,
|
|
|
|
b->path, tree_entry_len(b), b->mode);
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
2007-02-16 08:32:45 +08:00
|
|
|
/*
|
|
|
|
* Inspect two trees, and give a score that tells how similar they are.
|
|
|
|
*/
|
2016-04-18 07:10:41 +08:00
|
|
|
static int score_trees(const struct object_id *hash1, const struct object_id *hash2)
|
2007-02-16 08:32:45 +08:00
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
struct tree_desc one;
|
|
|
|
struct tree_desc two;
|
2013-06-14 02:19:28 +08:00
|
|
|
void *one_buf = fill_tree_desc_strict(&one, hash1);
|
|
|
|
void *two_buf = fill_tree_desc_strict(&two, hash2);
|
2007-02-16 08:32:45 +08:00
|
|
|
int score = 0;
|
|
|
|
|
2013-03-25 06:46:28 +08:00
|
|
|
for (;;) {
|
2007-02-16 08:32:45 +08:00
|
|
|
int cmp;
|
|
|
|
|
score_trees(): fix iteration over trees with missing entries
In score_trees(), we walk over two sorted trees to find
which entries are missing or have different content between
the two. So if we have two trees with these entries:
one two
--- ---
a a
b c
c d
we'd expect the loop to:
- compare "a" to "a"
- compare "b" to "c"; because these are sorted lists, we
know that the second tree does not have "b"
- compare "c" to "c"
- compare "d" to end-of-list; we know that the first tree
does not have "d"
And prior to d8febde370 (match-trees: simplify score_trees()
using tree_entry(), 2013-03-24) that worked. But after that
commit, we mistakenly increment the tree pointers for every
loop iteration, even when we've processed the entry for only
one side. As a result, we end up doing this:
- compare "a" to "a"
- compare "b" to "c"; we know that we do not have "b", but
we still increment both tree pointers; at this point
we're out of sync and all further comparisons are wrong
- compare "c" to "d" and mistakenly claim that the second
tree does not have "c"
- exit the loop, mistakenly not realizing that the first
tree does not have "d"
So contrary to the claim in d8febde370, we really do need to
manually use update_tree_entry(), because advancing the tree
pointer depends on the entry comparison.
That means we must stop using tree_entry() to access each
entry, since it auto-advances the pointer. Instead:
- we'll use tree_desc.size directly to know if there's
anything left to look at (which is what tree_entry() was
doing under the hood)
- rather than do an extra struct assignment to "e1" and
"e2", we can just access the "entry" field of tree_desc
directly
That makes us a little more intimate with the tree_desc
code, but that's not uncommon for its callers.
The included test shows off the bug by adding a new entry
"bar.t", which sorts early in the tree and de-syncs the
comparison for "foo.t", which comes after.
Reported-by: George Shammas <georgyo@gmail.com>
Helped-by: René Scharfe <l.s.r@web.de>
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2018-08-03 02:58:21 +08:00
|
|
|
if (one.size && two.size)
|
|
|
|
cmp = base_name_entries_compare(&one.entry, &two.entry);
|
|
|
|
else if (one.size)
|
2007-02-16 08:32:45 +08:00
|
|
|
/* two lacks this entry */
|
2013-03-25 06:46:28 +08:00
|
|
|
cmp = -1;
|
score_trees(): fix iteration over trees with missing entries
In score_trees(), we walk over two sorted trees to find
which entries are missing or have different content between
the two. So if we have two trees with these entries:
one two
--- ---
a a
b c
c d
we'd expect the loop to:
- compare "a" to "a"
- compare "b" to "c"; because these are sorted lists, we
know that the second tree does not have "b"
- compare "c" to "c"
- compare "d" to end-of-list; we know that the first tree
does not have "d"
And prior to d8febde370 (match-trees: simplify score_trees()
using tree_entry(), 2013-03-24) that worked. But after that
commit, we mistakenly increment the tree pointers for every
loop iteration, even when we've processed the entry for only
one side. As a result, we end up doing this:
- compare "a" to "a"
- compare "b" to "c"; we know that we do not have "b", but
we still increment both tree pointers; at this point
we're out of sync and all further comparisons are wrong
- compare "c" to "d" and mistakenly claim that the second
tree does not have "c"
- exit the loop, mistakenly not realizing that the first
tree does not have "d"
So contrary to the claim in d8febde370, we really do need to
manually use update_tree_entry(), because advancing the tree
pointer depends on the entry comparison.
That means we must stop using tree_entry() to access each
entry, since it auto-advances the pointer. Instead:
- we'll use tree_desc.size directly to know if there's
anything left to look at (which is what tree_entry() was
doing under the hood)
- rather than do an extra struct assignment to "e1" and
"e2", we can just access the "entry" field of tree_desc
directly
That makes us a little more intimate with the tree_desc
code, but that's not uncommon for its callers.
The included test shows off the bug by adding a new entry
"bar.t", which sorts early in the tree and de-syncs the
comparison for "foo.t", which comes after.
Reported-by: George Shammas <georgyo@gmail.com>
Helped-by: René Scharfe <l.s.r@web.de>
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2018-08-03 02:58:21 +08:00
|
|
|
else if (two.size)
|
2013-03-25 06:46:28 +08:00
|
|
|
/* two has more entries */
|
|
|
|
cmp = 1;
|
|
|
|
else
|
|
|
|
break;
|
|
|
|
|
score_trees(): fix iteration over trees with missing entries
In score_trees(), we walk over two sorted trees to find
which entries are missing or have different content between
the two. So if we have two trees with these entries:
one two
--- ---
a a
b c
c d
we'd expect the loop to:
- compare "a" to "a"
- compare "b" to "c"; because these are sorted lists, we
know that the second tree does not have "b"
- compare "c" to "c"
- compare "d" to end-of-list; we know that the first tree
does not have "d"
And prior to d8febde370 (match-trees: simplify score_trees()
using tree_entry(), 2013-03-24) that worked. But after that
commit, we mistakenly increment the tree pointers for every
loop iteration, even when we've processed the entry for only
one side. As a result, we end up doing this:
- compare "a" to "a"
- compare "b" to "c"; we know that we do not have "b", but
we still increment both tree pointers; at this point
we're out of sync and all further comparisons are wrong
- compare "c" to "d" and mistakenly claim that the second
tree does not have "c"
- exit the loop, mistakenly not realizing that the first
tree does not have "d"
So contrary to the claim in d8febde370, we really do need to
manually use update_tree_entry(), because advancing the tree
pointer depends on the entry comparison.
That means we must stop using tree_entry() to access each
entry, since it auto-advances the pointer. Instead:
- we'll use tree_desc.size directly to know if there's
anything left to look at (which is what tree_entry() was
doing under the hood)
- rather than do an extra struct assignment to "e1" and
"e2", we can just access the "entry" field of tree_desc
directly
That makes us a little more intimate with the tree_desc
code, but that's not uncommon for its callers.
The included test shows off the bug by adding a new entry
"bar.t", which sorts early in the tree and de-syncs the
comparison for "foo.t", which comes after.
Reported-by: George Shammas <georgyo@gmail.com>
Helped-by: René Scharfe <l.s.r@web.de>
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2018-08-03 02:58:21 +08:00
|
|
|
if (cmp < 0) {
|
2007-02-16 08:32:45 +08:00
|
|
|
/* path1 does not appear in two */
|
2019-01-24 21:11:34 +08:00
|
|
|
score += score_missing(one.entry.mode);
|
score_trees(): fix iteration over trees with missing entries
In score_trees(), we walk over two sorted trees to find
which entries are missing or have different content between
the two. So if we have two trees with these entries:
one two
--- ---
a a
b c
c d
we'd expect the loop to:
- compare "a" to "a"
- compare "b" to "c"; because these are sorted lists, we
know that the second tree does not have "b"
- compare "c" to "c"
- compare "d" to end-of-list; we know that the first tree
does not have "d"
And prior to d8febde370 (match-trees: simplify score_trees()
using tree_entry(), 2013-03-24) that worked. But after that
commit, we mistakenly increment the tree pointers for every
loop iteration, even when we've processed the entry for only
one side. As a result, we end up doing this:
- compare "a" to "a"
- compare "b" to "c"; we know that we do not have "b", but
we still increment both tree pointers; at this point
we're out of sync and all further comparisons are wrong
- compare "c" to "d" and mistakenly claim that the second
tree does not have "c"
- exit the loop, mistakenly not realizing that the first
tree does not have "d"
So contrary to the claim in d8febde370, we really do need to
manually use update_tree_entry(), because advancing the tree
pointer depends on the entry comparison.
That means we must stop using tree_entry() to access each
entry, since it auto-advances the pointer. Instead:
- we'll use tree_desc.size directly to know if there's
anything left to look at (which is what tree_entry() was
doing under the hood)
- rather than do an extra struct assignment to "e1" and
"e2", we can just access the "entry" field of tree_desc
directly
That makes us a little more intimate with the tree_desc
code, but that's not uncommon for its callers.
The included test shows off the bug by adding a new entry
"bar.t", which sorts early in the tree and de-syncs the
comparison for "foo.t", which comes after.
Reported-by: George Shammas <georgyo@gmail.com>
Helped-by: René Scharfe <l.s.r@web.de>
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2018-08-03 02:58:21 +08:00
|
|
|
update_tree_entry(&one);
|
|
|
|
} else if (cmp > 0) {
|
2007-02-16 08:32:45 +08:00
|
|
|
/* path2 does not appear in one */
|
2019-01-24 21:11:34 +08:00
|
|
|
score += score_missing(two.entry.mode);
|
score_trees(): fix iteration over trees with missing entries
In score_trees(), we walk over two sorted trees to find
which entries are missing or have different content between
the two. So if we have two trees with these entries:
one two
--- ---
a a
b c
c d
we'd expect the loop to:
- compare "a" to "a"
- compare "b" to "c"; because these are sorted lists, we
know that the second tree does not have "b"
- compare "c" to "c"
- compare "d" to end-of-list; we know that the first tree
does not have "d"
And prior to d8febde370 (match-trees: simplify score_trees()
using tree_entry(), 2013-03-24) that worked. But after that
commit, we mistakenly increment the tree pointers for every
loop iteration, even when we've processed the entry for only
one side. As a result, we end up doing this:
- compare "a" to "a"
- compare "b" to "c"; we know that we do not have "b", but
we still increment both tree pointers; at this point
we're out of sync and all further comparisons are wrong
- compare "c" to "d" and mistakenly claim that the second
tree does not have "c"
- exit the loop, mistakenly not realizing that the first
tree does not have "d"
So contrary to the claim in d8febde370, we really do need to
manually use update_tree_entry(), because advancing the tree
pointer depends on the entry comparison.
That means we must stop using tree_entry() to access each
entry, since it auto-advances the pointer. Instead:
- we'll use tree_desc.size directly to know if there's
anything left to look at (which is what tree_entry() was
doing under the hood)
- rather than do an extra struct assignment to "e1" and
"e2", we can just access the "entry" field of tree_desc
directly
That makes us a little more intimate with the tree_desc
code, but that's not uncommon for its callers.
The included test shows off the bug by adding a new entry
"bar.t", which sorts early in the tree and de-syncs the
comparison for "foo.t", which comes after.
Reported-by: George Shammas <georgyo@gmail.com>
Helped-by: René Scharfe <l.s.r@web.de>
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2018-08-03 02:58:21 +08:00
|
|
|
update_tree_entry(&two);
|
|
|
|
} else {
|
|
|
|
/* path appears in both */
|
2019-01-15 08:39:44 +08:00
|
|
|
if (!oideq(&one.entry.oid, &two.entry.oid)) {
|
score_trees(): fix iteration over trees with missing entries
In score_trees(), we walk over two sorted trees to find
which entries are missing or have different content between
the two. So if we have two trees with these entries:
one two
--- ---
a a
b c
c d
we'd expect the loop to:
- compare "a" to "a"
- compare "b" to "c"; because these are sorted lists, we
know that the second tree does not have "b"
- compare "c" to "c"
- compare "d" to end-of-list; we know that the first tree
does not have "d"
And prior to d8febde370 (match-trees: simplify score_trees()
using tree_entry(), 2013-03-24) that worked. But after that
commit, we mistakenly increment the tree pointers for every
loop iteration, even when we've processed the entry for only
one side. As a result, we end up doing this:
- compare "a" to "a"
- compare "b" to "c"; we know that we do not have "b", but
we still increment both tree pointers; at this point
we're out of sync and all further comparisons are wrong
- compare "c" to "d" and mistakenly claim that the second
tree does not have "c"
- exit the loop, mistakenly not realizing that the first
tree does not have "d"
So contrary to the claim in d8febde370, we really do need to
manually use update_tree_entry(), because advancing the tree
pointer depends on the entry comparison.
That means we must stop using tree_entry() to access each
entry, since it auto-advances the pointer. Instead:
- we'll use tree_desc.size directly to know if there's
anything left to look at (which is what tree_entry() was
doing under the hood)
- rather than do an extra struct assignment to "e1" and
"e2", we can just access the "entry" field of tree_desc
directly
That makes us a little more intimate with the tree_desc
code, but that's not uncommon for its callers.
The included test shows off the bug by adding a new entry
"bar.t", which sorts early in the tree and de-syncs the
comparison for "foo.t", which comes after.
Reported-by: George Shammas <georgyo@gmail.com>
Helped-by: René Scharfe <l.s.r@web.de>
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2018-08-03 02:58:21 +08:00
|
|
|
/* they are different */
|
|
|
|
score += score_differs(one.entry.mode,
|
2019-01-24 21:11:34 +08:00
|
|
|
two.entry.mode);
|
score_trees(): fix iteration over trees with missing entries
In score_trees(), we walk over two sorted trees to find
which entries are missing or have different content between
the two. So if we have two trees with these entries:
one two
--- ---
a a
b c
c d
we'd expect the loop to:
- compare "a" to "a"
- compare "b" to "c"; because these are sorted lists, we
know that the second tree does not have "b"
- compare "c" to "c"
- compare "d" to end-of-list; we know that the first tree
does not have "d"
And prior to d8febde370 (match-trees: simplify score_trees()
using tree_entry(), 2013-03-24) that worked. But after that
commit, we mistakenly increment the tree pointers for every
loop iteration, even when we've processed the entry for only
one side. As a result, we end up doing this:
- compare "a" to "a"
- compare "b" to "c"; we know that we do not have "b", but
we still increment both tree pointers; at this point
we're out of sync and all further comparisons are wrong
- compare "c" to "d" and mistakenly claim that the second
tree does not have "c"
- exit the loop, mistakenly not realizing that the first
tree does not have "d"
So contrary to the claim in d8febde370, we really do need to
manually use update_tree_entry(), because advancing the tree
pointer depends on the entry comparison.
That means we must stop using tree_entry() to access each
entry, since it auto-advances the pointer. Instead:
- we'll use tree_desc.size directly to know if there's
anything left to look at (which is what tree_entry() was
doing under the hood)
- rather than do an extra struct assignment to "e1" and
"e2", we can just access the "entry" field of tree_desc
directly
That makes us a little more intimate with the tree_desc
code, but that's not uncommon for its callers.
The included test shows off the bug by adding a new entry
"bar.t", which sorts early in the tree and de-syncs the
comparison for "foo.t", which comes after.
Reported-by: George Shammas <georgyo@gmail.com>
Helped-by: René Scharfe <l.s.r@web.de>
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2018-08-03 02:58:21 +08:00
|
|
|
} else {
|
|
|
|
/* same subtree or blob */
|
|
|
|
score += score_matches(one.entry.mode,
|
2019-01-24 21:11:34 +08:00
|
|
|
two.entry.mode);
|
score_trees(): fix iteration over trees with missing entries
In score_trees(), we walk over two sorted trees to find
which entries are missing or have different content between
the two. So if we have two trees with these entries:
one two
--- ---
a a
b c
c d
we'd expect the loop to:
- compare "a" to "a"
- compare "b" to "c"; because these are sorted lists, we
know that the second tree does not have "b"
- compare "c" to "c"
- compare "d" to end-of-list; we know that the first tree
does not have "d"
And prior to d8febde370 (match-trees: simplify score_trees()
using tree_entry(), 2013-03-24) that worked. But after that
commit, we mistakenly increment the tree pointers for every
loop iteration, even when we've processed the entry for only
one side. As a result, we end up doing this:
- compare "a" to "a"
- compare "b" to "c"; we know that we do not have "b", but
we still increment both tree pointers; at this point
we're out of sync and all further comparisons are wrong
- compare "c" to "d" and mistakenly claim that the second
tree does not have "c"
- exit the loop, mistakenly not realizing that the first
tree does not have "d"
So contrary to the claim in d8febde370, we really do need to
manually use update_tree_entry(), because advancing the tree
pointer depends on the entry comparison.
That means we must stop using tree_entry() to access each
entry, since it auto-advances the pointer. Instead:
- we'll use tree_desc.size directly to know if there's
anything left to look at (which is what tree_entry() was
doing under the hood)
- rather than do an extra struct assignment to "e1" and
"e2", we can just access the "entry" field of tree_desc
directly
That makes us a little more intimate with the tree_desc
code, but that's not uncommon for its callers.
The included test shows off the bug by adding a new entry
"bar.t", which sorts early in the tree and de-syncs the
comparison for "foo.t", which comes after.
Reported-by: George Shammas <georgyo@gmail.com>
Helped-by: René Scharfe <l.s.r@web.de>
Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2018-08-03 02:58:21 +08:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
update_tree_entry(&one);
|
|
|
|
update_tree_entry(&two);
|
|
|
|
}
|
2007-02-16 08:32:45 +08:00
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
free(one_buf);
|
|
|
|
free(two_buf);
|
|
|
|
return score;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/*
|
|
|
|
* Match one itself and its subtrees with two and pick the best match.
|
|
|
|
*/
|
2016-04-18 07:10:41 +08:00
|
|
|
static void match_trees(const struct object_id *hash1,
|
|
|
|
const struct object_id *hash2,
|
2007-02-16 08:32:45 +08:00
|
|
|
int *best_score,
|
|
|
|
char **best_match,
|
2007-10-21 12:12:12 +08:00
|
|
|
const char *base,
|
2007-02-16 08:32:45 +08:00
|
|
|
int recurse_limit)
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
struct tree_desc one;
|
2013-06-14 02:19:28 +08:00
|
|
|
void *one_buf = fill_tree_desc_strict(&one, hash1);
|
2007-02-16 08:32:45 +08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
while (one.size) {
|
|
|
|
const char *path;
|
2016-04-18 07:10:40 +08:00
|
|
|
const struct object_id *elem;
|
2019-04-05 23:00:12 +08:00
|
|
|
unsigned short mode;
|
2007-02-16 08:32:45 +08:00
|
|
|
int score;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
elem = tree_entry_extract(&one, &path, &mode);
|
|
|
|
if (!S_ISDIR(mode))
|
|
|
|
goto next;
|
2016-04-18 07:10:41 +08:00
|
|
|
score = score_trees(elem, hash2);
|
2007-02-16 08:32:45 +08:00
|
|
|
if (*best_score < score) {
|
|
|
|
free(*best_match);
|
2014-06-20 05:24:33 +08:00
|
|
|
*best_match = xstrfmt("%s%s", base, path);
|
2007-02-16 08:32:45 +08:00
|
|
|
*best_score = score;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
if (recurse_limit) {
|
2014-06-20 05:24:33 +08:00
|
|
|
char *newbase = xstrfmt("%s%s/", base, path);
|
2016-04-18 07:10:41 +08:00
|
|
|
match_trees(elem, hash2, best_score, best_match,
|
2007-02-16 08:32:45 +08:00
|
|
|
newbase, recurse_limit - 1);
|
|
|
|
free(newbase);
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
next:
|
|
|
|
update_tree_entry(&one);
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
free(one_buf);
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/*
|
2018-01-28 08:13:15 +08:00
|
|
|
* A tree "oid1" has a subdirectory at "prefix". Come up with a tree object by
|
|
|
|
* replacing it with another tree "oid2".
|
2007-02-16 08:32:45 +08:00
|
|
|
*/
|
2018-01-28 08:13:15 +08:00
|
|
|
static int splice_tree(const struct object_id *oid1, const char *prefix,
|
|
|
|
const struct object_id *oid2, struct object_id *result)
|
2007-02-16 08:32:45 +08:00
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
char *subpath;
|
|
|
|
int toplen;
|
|
|
|
char *buf;
|
|
|
|
unsigned long sz;
|
|
|
|
struct tree_desc desc;
|
2019-01-15 08:39:43 +08:00
|
|
|
unsigned char *rewrite_here;
|
2018-01-28 08:13:15 +08:00
|
|
|
const struct object_id *rewrite_with;
|
|
|
|
struct object_id subtree;
|
2007-02-16 08:32:45 +08:00
|
|
|
enum object_type type;
|
|
|
|
int status;
|
|
|
|
|
2014-03-08 14:48:31 +08:00
|
|
|
subpath = strchrnul(prefix, '/');
|
|
|
|
toplen = subpath - prefix;
|
|
|
|
if (*subpath)
|
2007-02-16 08:32:45 +08:00
|
|
|
subpath++;
|
|
|
|
|
2023-03-28 21:58:50 +08:00
|
|
|
buf = repo_read_object_file(the_repository, oid1, &type, &sz);
|
2007-02-16 08:32:45 +08:00
|
|
|
if (!buf)
|
2018-01-28 08:13:15 +08:00
|
|
|
die("cannot read tree %s", oid_to_hex(oid1));
|
2023-10-02 10:40:28 +08:00
|
|
|
init_tree_desc(&desc, oid1, buf, sz);
|
2007-02-16 08:32:45 +08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
rewrite_here = NULL;
|
|
|
|
while (desc.size) {
|
|
|
|
const char *name;
|
2019-04-05 23:00:12 +08:00
|
|
|
unsigned short mode;
|
2007-02-16 08:32:45 +08:00
|
|
|
|
2019-01-15 08:39:42 +08:00
|
|
|
tree_entry_extract(&desc, &name, &mode);
|
2007-02-16 08:32:45 +08:00
|
|
|
if (strlen(name) == toplen &&
|
|
|
|
!memcmp(name, prefix, toplen)) {
|
|
|
|
if (!S_ISDIR(mode))
|
2018-01-28 08:13:15 +08:00
|
|
|
die("entry %s in tree %s is not a tree", name,
|
|
|
|
oid_to_hex(oid1));
|
2019-01-15 08:39:43 +08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/*
|
|
|
|
* We cast here for two reasons:
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
* - to flip the "char *" (for the path) to "unsigned
|
|
|
|
* char *" (for the hash stored after it)
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
* - to discard the "const"; this is OK because we
|
|
|
|
* know it points into our non-const "buf"
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
rewrite_here = (unsigned char *)(desc.entry.path +
|
|
|
|
strlen(desc.entry.path) +
|
|
|
|
1);
|
2007-02-16 08:32:45 +08:00
|
|
|
break;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
update_tree_entry(&desc);
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
if (!rewrite_here)
|
2018-01-28 08:13:15 +08:00
|
|
|
die("entry %.*s not found in tree %s", toplen, prefix,
|
|
|
|
oid_to_hex(oid1));
|
2014-03-08 14:48:31 +08:00
|
|
|
if (*subpath) {
|
2019-01-15 08:39:43 +08:00
|
|
|
struct object_id tree_oid;
|
2021-04-26 09:02:50 +08:00
|
|
|
oidread(&tree_oid, rewrite_here);
|
2019-01-15 08:39:43 +08:00
|
|
|
status = splice_tree(&tree_oid, subpath, oid2, &subtree);
|
2007-02-16 08:32:45 +08:00
|
|
|
if (status)
|
|
|
|
return status;
|
2018-01-28 08:13:15 +08:00
|
|
|
rewrite_with = &subtree;
|
|
|
|
} else {
|
|
|
|
rewrite_with = oid2;
|
2007-02-16 08:32:45 +08:00
|
|
|
}
|
2019-01-15 08:39:43 +08:00
|
|
|
hashcpy(rewrite_here, rewrite_with->hash);
|
2022-02-05 07:48:26 +08:00
|
|
|
status = write_object_file(buf, sz, OBJ_TREE, result);
|
2007-02-16 08:32:45 +08:00
|
|
|
free(buf);
|
|
|
|
return status;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/*
|
|
|
|
* We are trying to come up with a merge between one and two that
|
|
|
|
* results in a tree shape similar to one. The tree two might
|
|
|
|
* correspond to a subtree of one, in which case it needs to be
|
|
|
|
* shifted down by prefixing otherwise empty directories. On the
|
|
|
|
* other hand, it could cover tree one and we might need to pick a
|
|
|
|
* subtree of it.
|
|
|
|
*/
|
2019-06-27 17:28:51 +08:00
|
|
|
void shift_tree(struct repository *r,
|
|
|
|
const struct object_id *hash1,
|
2016-04-18 07:10:38 +08:00
|
|
|
const struct object_id *hash2,
|
|
|
|
struct object_id *shifted,
|
2007-02-16 08:32:45 +08:00
|
|
|
int depth_limit)
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
char *add_prefix;
|
|
|
|
char *del_prefix;
|
|
|
|
int add_score, del_score;
|
|
|
|
|
2008-07-01 13:18:57 +08:00
|
|
|
/*
|
|
|
|
* NEEDSWORK: this limits the recursion depth to hardcoded
|
|
|
|
* value '2' to avoid excessive overhead.
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
if (!depth_limit)
|
|
|
|
depth_limit = 2;
|
|
|
|
|
2016-04-18 07:10:41 +08:00
|
|
|
add_score = del_score = score_trees(hash1, hash2);
|
2007-02-16 08:32:45 +08:00
|
|
|
add_prefix = xcalloc(1, 1);
|
|
|
|
del_prefix = xcalloc(1, 1);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/*
|
|
|
|
* See if one's subtree resembles two; if so we need to prefix
|
|
|
|
* two with a few fake trees to match the prefix.
|
|
|
|
*/
|
2016-04-18 07:10:41 +08:00
|
|
|
match_trees(hash1, hash2, &add_score, &add_prefix, "", depth_limit);
|
2007-02-16 08:32:45 +08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/*
|
|
|
|
* See if two's subtree resembles one; if so we need to
|
|
|
|
* pick only subtree of two.
|
|
|
|
*/
|
2016-04-18 07:10:41 +08:00
|
|
|
match_trees(hash2, hash1, &del_score, &del_prefix, "", depth_limit);
|
2007-02-16 08:32:45 +08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/* Assume we do not have to do any shifting */
|
2016-04-18 07:10:38 +08:00
|
|
|
oidcpy(shifted, hash2);
|
2007-02-16 08:32:45 +08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if (add_score < del_score) {
|
|
|
|
/* We need to pick a subtree of two */
|
2019-04-05 23:00:12 +08:00
|
|
|
unsigned short mode;
|
2007-02-16 08:32:45 +08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if (!*del_prefix)
|
|
|
|
return;
|
|
|
|
|
2019-06-27 17:28:51 +08:00
|
|
|
if (get_tree_entry(r, hash2, del_prefix, shifted, &mode))
|
2007-02-16 08:32:45 +08:00
|
|
|
die("cannot find path %s in tree %s",
|
2016-04-18 07:10:38 +08:00
|
|
|
del_prefix, oid_to_hex(hash2));
|
2007-02-16 08:32:45 +08:00
|
|
|
return;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if (!*add_prefix)
|
|
|
|
return;
|
|
|
|
|
2018-01-28 08:13:15 +08:00
|
|
|
splice_tree(hash1, add_prefix, hash2, shifted);
|
2007-02-16 08:32:45 +08:00
|
|
|
}
|
2008-07-01 13:18:57 +08:00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/*
|
|
|
|
* The user says the trees will be shifted by this much.
|
|
|
|
* Unfortunately we cannot fundamentally tell which one to
|
|
|
|
* be prefixed, as recursive merge can work in either direction.
|
|
|
|
*/
|
2019-06-27 17:28:51 +08:00
|
|
|
void shift_tree_by(struct repository *r,
|
|
|
|
const struct object_id *hash1,
|
2016-04-18 07:10:38 +08:00
|
|
|
const struct object_id *hash2,
|
|
|
|
struct object_id *shifted,
|
2008-07-01 13:18:57 +08:00
|
|
|
const char *shift_prefix)
|
|
|
|
{
|
2016-04-18 07:10:38 +08:00
|
|
|
struct object_id sub1, sub2;
|
2019-04-05 23:00:12 +08:00
|
|
|
unsigned short mode1, mode2;
|
2008-07-01 13:18:57 +08:00
|
|
|
unsigned candidate = 0;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/* Can hash2 be a tree at shift_prefix in tree hash1? */
|
2019-06-27 17:28:51 +08:00
|
|
|
if (!get_tree_entry(r, hash1, shift_prefix, &sub1, &mode1) &&
|
2008-07-01 13:18:57 +08:00
|
|
|
S_ISDIR(mode1))
|
|
|
|
candidate |= 1;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/* Can hash1 be a tree at shift_prefix in tree hash2? */
|
2019-06-27 17:28:51 +08:00
|
|
|
if (!get_tree_entry(r, hash2, shift_prefix, &sub2, &mode2) &&
|
2008-07-01 13:18:57 +08:00
|
|
|
S_ISDIR(mode2))
|
|
|
|
candidate |= 2;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if (candidate == 3) {
|
|
|
|
/* Both are plausible -- we need to evaluate the score */
|
2016-04-18 07:10:41 +08:00
|
|
|
int best_score = score_trees(hash1, hash2);
|
2008-07-01 13:18:57 +08:00
|
|
|
int score;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
candidate = 0;
|
2016-04-18 07:10:41 +08:00
|
|
|
score = score_trees(&sub1, hash2);
|
2008-07-01 13:18:57 +08:00
|
|
|
if (score > best_score) {
|
|
|
|
candidate = 1;
|
|
|
|
best_score = score;
|
|
|
|
}
|
2016-04-18 07:10:41 +08:00
|
|
|
score = score_trees(&sub2, hash1);
|
2008-07-01 13:18:57 +08:00
|
|
|
if (score > best_score)
|
|
|
|
candidate = 2;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if (!candidate) {
|
|
|
|
/* Neither is plausible -- do not shift */
|
2016-04-18 07:10:38 +08:00
|
|
|
oidcpy(shifted, hash2);
|
2008-07-01 13:18:57 +08:00
|
|
|
return;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if (candidate == 1)
|
|
|
|
/*
|
|
|
|
* shift tree2 down by adding shift_prefix above it
|
|
|
|
* to match tree1.
|
|
|
|
*/
|
2018-01-28 08:13:15 +08:00
|
|
|
splice_tree(hash1, shift_prefix, hash2, shifted);
|
2008-07-01 13:18:57 +08:00
|
|
|
else
|
|
|
|
/*
|
|
|
|
* shift tree2 up by removing shift_prefix from it
|
|
|
|
* to match tree1.
|
|
|
|
*/
|
2016-04-18 07:10:38 +08:00
|
|
|
oidcpy(shifted, &sub2);
|
2008-07-01 13:18:57 +08:00
|
|
|
}
|