kernel/git - git - PowerEL Git System

Commit Graph

Author	SHA1	Message	Date
Jeff King	6c003d6ffb	reopen_tempfile(): truncate opened file We provide a reopen_tempfile() function, which is in turn used by reopen_lockfile(). The idea is that a caller may want to rewrite the tempfile without letting go of the lock. And that's what our one caller does: after running add--interactive, "commit -p" will update the cache-tree extension of the index and write out the result, all while holding the lock. However, because we open the file with only the O_WRONLY flag, the existing index content is left in place, and we overwrite it starting at position 0. If the new index after updating the cache-tree is smaller than the original, those final bytes are not overwritten and remain in the file. This results in a corrupt index, since those cruft bytes are interpreted as part of the trailing hash (or even as an extension, if there are enough bytes). This bug actually pre-dates reopen_tempfile(); the original code from `9c4d6c0297` (cache-tree: Write updated cache-tree after commit, 2014-07-13) has the same bug, and those lines were eventually refactored into the tempfile module. Nobody noticed until now for two reasons: - the bug can only be triggered in interactive mode ("commit -p" or "commit -i") - the size of the index must shrink after updating the cache-tree, which implies a non-trivial deletion. Notice that the included test actually has to create a 2-deep hierarchy. A single level is not enough to actually cause shrinkage. The fix is to truncate the file before writing out the second index. We can do that at the caller by using ftruncate(). But we shouldn't have to do that. There is no other place in Git where we want to open a file and overwrite bytes, making reopen_tempfile() a confusing and error-prone interface. Let's pass O_TRUNC there, which gives callers the same state they had after initially opening the file or lock. It's possible that we could later add a caller that wants something else (e.g., to open with O_APPEND). But this is the only caller we've had in the history of the codebase. Let's punt on doing anything more clever until another one comes along. Reported-by: Luc Van Oostenryck <luc.vanoostenryck@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>	6 years ago
Elijah Newren	ef3ca95475	Add missing includes and forward declarations I looped over the toplevel header files, creating a temporary two-line C program for each consisting of #include "git-compat-util.h" #include $HEADER This patch is the result of manually fixing errors in compiling those tiny programs. Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>	7 years ago
Brandon Williams	ea8ace4ad3	tempfile: rename 'template' variables Rename C++ keyword in order to bring the codebase closer to being able to be compiled with a C++ compiler. Signed-off-by: Brandon Williams <bmwill@google.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>	7 years ago
Martin Ågren	5de134ca85	tempfile: fix documentation on `delete_tempfile()` The function has always been documented as returning 0 or -1. It is in fact `void`. Correct that. As part of the rearrangements we lose the mention that `delete_tempfile()` might set `errno`. Because there is no return value, the user can't really know whether it did anyway. Signed-off-by: Martin Ågren <martin.agren@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>	7 years ago
Jeff King	076aa2cbda	tempfile: auto-allocate tempfiles on heap The previous commit taught the tempfile code to give up ownership over tempfiles that have been renamed or deleted. That makes it possible to use a stack variable like this: struct tempfile t; create_tempfile(&t, ...); ... if (!err) rename_tempfile(&t, ...); else delete_tempfile(&t); But doing it this way has a high potential for creating memory errors. The tempfile we pass to create_tempfile() ends up on a global linked list, and it's not safe for it to go out of scope until we've called one of those two deactivation functions. Imagine that we add an early return from the function that forgets to call delete_tempfile(). With a static or heap tempfile variable, the worst case is that the tempfile hangs around until the program exits (and some functions like setup_shallow_temporary rely on this intentionally, creating a tempfile and then leaving it for later cleanup). But with a stack variable as above, this is a serious memory error: the variable goes out of scope and may be filled with garbage by the time the tempfile code looks at it. Let's see if we can make it harder to get this wrong. Since many callers need to allocate arbitrary numbers of tempfiles, we can't rely on static storage as a general solution. So we need to turn to the heap. We could just ask all callers to pass us a heap variable, but that puts the burden on them to call free() at the right time. Instead, let's have the tempfile code handle the heap allocation _and_ the deallocation (when the tempfile is deactivated and removed from the list). This changes the return value of all of the creation functions. For the cleanup functions (delete and rename), we'll add one extra bit of safety: instead of taking a tempfile pointer, we'll take a pointer-to-pointer and set it to NULL after freeing the object. This makes it safe to double-call functions like delete_tempfile(), as the second call treats the NULL input as a noop. Several callsites follow this pattern. The resulting patch does have a fair bit of noise, as each caller needs to be converted to handle: 1. Storing a pointer instead of the struct itself. 2. Passing the pointer instead of taking the struct address. 3. Handling a "struct tempfile " return instead of a file descriptor. We could play games to make this less noisy. For example, by defining the tempfile like this: struct tempfile { struct heap_allocated_part_of_tempfile { int fd; ...etc } actual_data; } Callers would continue to have a "struct tempfile", and it would be "active" only when the inner pointer was non-NULL. But that just makes things more awkward in the long run. There aren't that many callers, so we can simply bite the bullet and adjust all of them. And the compiler makes it easy for us to find them all. Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>	7 years ago
Jeff King	422a21c6a0	tempfile: remove deactivated list entries Once a "struct tempfile" is added to the global cleanup list, it is never removed. This means that its storage must remain valid for the lifetime of the program. For single-use tempfiles and locks, this isn't a big deal: we just declare the struct static. But for library code which may take multiple simultaneous locks (like the ref code), they're forced to allocate a struct on the heap and leak it. This is mostly OK in practice. The size of the leak is bounded by the number of refs, and most programs exit after operating on a fixed number of refs (and allocate simultaneous memory proportional to the number of ref updates in the first place). But: 1. It isn't hard to imagine a real leak: a program which runs for a long time taking a series of ref update instructions and fulfilling them one by one. I don't think we have such a program now, but it's certainly plausible. 2. The leaked entries appear as false positives to tools like valgrind. Let's relax this rule by keeping only "active" tempfiles on the list. We can do this easily by moving the list-add operation from prepare_tempfile_object to activate_tempfile, and adding a deletion in deactivate_tempfile. Existing callers do not need to be updated immediately. They'll continue to leak any tempfile objects they may have allocated, but that's no different than the status quo. We can clean them up individually. Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>	7 years ago
Jeff King	24d82185d2	tempfile: use list.h for linked list The tempfile API keeps to-be-cleaned tempfiles in a singly-linked list and never removes items from the list. A future patch would like to start removing items, but removal from a singly linked list is O(n), as we have to walk the list to find the predecessor element. This means that a process which takes "n" simultaneous lockfiles (for example, an atomic transaction on "n" refs) may end up quadratic in "n". Before we start allowing items to be removed, it would be nice to have a way to cover this case in linear time. The simplest solution is to make an assumption about the order in which tempfiles are added and removed from the list. If both operations iterate over the tempfiles in the same order, then by putting new items at the end of the list our removal search will always find its items at the beginning of the list. And indeed, that would work for the case of refs. But it creates a hidden dependency between unrelated parts of the code. If anybody changes the ref code (or if we add a new caller that opens multiple simultaneous tempfiles) they may unknowingly introduce a performance regression. Another solution is to use a better data structure. A doubly-linked list works fine, and we already have an implementation in list.h. But there's one snag: the elements of "struct tempfile" are all marked as "volatile", since a signal handler may interrupt us and iterate over the list at any moment (even if we were in the middle of adding a new entry). We can declare a "volatile struct list_head", but we can't actually use it with the normal list functions. The compiler complains about passing a pointer-to-volatile via a regular pointer argument. And rightfully so, as the sub-function would potentially need different code to deal with the volatile case. That leaves us with a few options: 1. Drop the "volatile" modifier for the list items. This is probably a bad idea. I checked the assembly output from "gcc -O2", and the "volatile" really does impact the order in which it updates memory. 2. Use macros instead of inline functions. The irony here is that list.h is entirely implemented as trivial inline functions. So we basically are already generating custom code for each call. But sadly there's no way in C to declare the inline function to take a more generic type. We could do so by switching the inline functions to macros, but it does make the end result harder to read. And it doesn't fully solve the problem (for instance, the declaration of list_head needs to change so that its "prev" and "next" pointers point to other volatile structs). 3. Don't use list.h, and just make our own ad-hoc doubly-linked list. It's not that much code to implement the basics that we need here. But if we're going to do so, why not add the few extra lines required to model it after the actual list.h interface? We can even reuse a few of the macro helpers. So this patch takes option 3, but actually implements a parallel "volatile list" interface in list.h, where it could potentially be reused by other code. This implements just enough for tempfile.c's use, though we could easily port other functions later if need be. Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>	7 years ago
Jeff King	f5b4dc7668	tempfile: handle NULL tempfile pointers gracefully The tempfile functions all take pointers to tempfile objects, but do not check whether the argument is NULL. This isn't a big deal in practice, since the lifetime of any tempfile object is defined to last for the whole program. So even if we try to call delete_tempfile() on an already-deleted tempfile, our "active" check will tell us that it's a noop. In preparation for transitioning to a new system that loosens the "tempfile objects can never be freed" rule, let's tighten up our active checks: 1. A NULL pointer is now defined as "inactive" (so it will BUG for most functions, but works as a silent noop for things like delete_tempfile). 2. Functions should always do the "active" check before looking at any of the struct fields. Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>	7 years ago
Jeff King	49bd0fc222	tempfile: do not delete tempfile on failed close When close_tempfile() fails, we delete the tempfile and reset the fields of the tempfile struct. This makes it easier for callers to return without cleaning up, but it also makes this common pattern: if (close_tempfile(tempfile)) return error_errno("error closing %s", tempfile->filename.buf); wrong, because the "filename" field has been reset after the failed close. And it's not easy to fix, as in many cases we don't have another copy of the filename (e.g., if it was created via one of the mks_tempfile functions, and we just have the original template string). Let's drop the feature that a failed close automatically deletes the file. This puts the burden on the caller to do the deletion themselves, but this isn't that big a deal. Callers which do: if (write(...) \|\| close_tempfile(...)) { delete_tempfile(...); return -1; } already had to call delete when the write() failed, and so aren't affected. Likewise, any caller which just calls die() in the error path is OK; we'll delete the tempfile during the atexit handler. Because this patch changes the semantics of close_tempfile() without changing its signature, all callers need to be manually checked and converted to the new scheme. This patch covers all in-tree callers, but there may be others for not-yet-merged topics. To catch these, we rename the function to close_tempfile_gently(), which will attract compile-time attention to new callers. (Technically the original could be considered "gentle" already in that it didn't die() on errors, but this one is even more so). Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>	7 years ago
Ben Wijen	05d1ed6148	mingw: ensure temporary file handles are not inherited by child processes When the index is locked and child processes inherit the handle to said lock and the parent process wants to remove the lock before the child process exits, on Windows there is a problem: it won't work because files cannot be deleted if a process holds a handle on them. The symptom: Rename from 'xxx/.git/index.lock' to 'xxx/.git/index' failed. Should I try again? (y/n) Spawning child processes with bInheritHandles==FALSE would not work because no file handles would be inherited, not even the hStdXxx handles in STARTUPINFO (stdin/stdout/stderr). Opening every file with O_NOINHERIT does not work, either, as e.g. git-upload-pack expects inherited file handles. This leaves us with the only way out: creating temp files with the O_NOINHERIT flag. This flag is Windows-specific, however. For our purposes, it is equivalent to O_CLOEXEC (which does not exist on Windows), so let's just open temporary files with the O_CLOEXEC flag and map that flag to O_NOINHERIT on Windows. As Eric Wong pointed out, we need to be careful to handle the case where the Linux headers used to compile Git support O_CLOEXEC but the Linux kernel used to run Git does not: it returns an EINVAL. This fixes the test that we just introduced to demonstrate the problem. Signed-off-by: Ben Wijen <ben@wijen.net> Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>	9 years ago
Michael Haggerty	99397152a3	register_tempfile(): new function to handle an existing temporary file Allow an existing file to be registered with the tempfile-handling infrastructure; in particular, arrange for it to be deleted on program exit. This can be used if the temporary file has to be created in a more complicated way than just open(). For example: * If the file itself needs to be created via the lockfile API * If it is not a regular file (e.g., a socket) Signed-off-by: Michael Haggerty <mhagger@alum.mit.edu> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>	10 years ago
Michael Haggerty	354ab11206	tempfile: add several functions for creating temporary files Add several functions for creating temporary files with automatically-generated names, analogous to mkstemps(), but also arranging for the files to be deleted on program exit. The functions are named according to a pattern depending how they operate. They will be used to replace many places in the code where temporary files are created and cleaned up ad-hoc. Signed-off-by: Michael Haggerty <mhagger@alum.mit.edu> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>	10 years ago
Michael Haggerty	1a9d15db25	tempfile: a new module for handling temporary files A lot of work went into defining the state diagram for lockfiles and ensuring correct, race-resistant cleanup in all circumstances. Most of that infrastructure can be applied directly to any temporary file. So extract a new "tempfile" module from the "lockfile" module. Reimplement lockfile on top of tempfile. Subsequent commits will add more users of the new module. Signed-off-by: Michael Haggerty <mhagger@alum.mit.edu> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>	10 years ago

14 Commits (7f125ff9094bfebbb381afa19380943a088c8fcb)