git/list-objects-filter-options.c, branch v2.41.2

Merge branch 'ab/remove-implicit-use-of-the-repository'

2023-04-06T20:38:30Z

Code clean-up around the use of the_repository. * ab/remove-implicit-use-of-the-repository: libs: use "struct repository *" argument, not "the_repository" post-cocci: adjust comments for recent repo_* migration cocci: apply the "revision.h" part of "the_repository.pending" cocci: apply the "rerere.h" part of "the_repository.pending" cocci: apply the "refs.h" part of "the_repository.pending" cocci: apply the "promisor-remote.h" part of "the_repository.pending" cocci: apply the "packfile.h" part of "the_repository.pending" cocci: apply the "pretty.h" part of "the_repository.pending" cocci: apply the "object-store.h" part of "the_repository.pending" cocci: apply the "diff.h" part of "the_repository.pending" cocci: apply the "commit.h" part of "the_repository.pending" cocci: apply the "commit-reach.h" part of "the_repository.pending" cocci: apply the "cache.h" part of "the_repository.pending" cocci: add missing "the_repository" macros to "pending" cocci: sort "the_repository" rules by header cocci: fix incorrect & verbose "the_repository" rules cocci: remove dead rule from "the_repository.pending.cocci"

Merge branch 'sg/parse-options-h-users'

2023-03-30T20:47:11Z

Code clean-up to include and/or uninclude parse-options.h file as needed. * sg/parse-options-h-users: treewide: remove unnecessary inclusions of parse-options.h from headers treewide: include parse-options.h in source files

cocci: apply the "promisor-remote.h" part of "the_repository.pending"

2023-03-28T14:36:46Z

Apply the part of "the_repository.pending.cocci" pertaining to "promisor-remote.h". Signed-off-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano

treewide: include parse-options.h in source files

2023-03-20T18:26:47Z

The builtins 'ls-remote', 'pack-objects', 'receive-pack', 'reflog' and 'send-pack' use parse_options(), but their source files don't directly include 'parse-options.h'. Furthermore, the source files 'diagnose.c', 'list-objects-filter-options.c', 'remote.c' and 'send-pack.c' define option parsing callback functions, while 'revision.c' defines an option parsing helper function, and thus need access to various fields in 'struct option' and 'struct parse_opt_ctx_t', but they don't directly include 'parse-options.h' either. They all can still be built, of course, because they include one of the header files that does include 'parse-options.h' (though unnecessarily, see the next commit). Add those missing includes to these files, as our general rule is that "a C file must directly include the header files that declare the functions and the types it uses". Signed-off-by: SZEDER Gábor Reviewed-by: Elijah Newren Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano

alloc.h: move ALLOC_GROW() functions from cache.h

2023-02-24T01:25:28Z

This allows us to replace includes of cache.h with includes of the much smaller alloc.h in many places. It does mean that we also need to add includes of alloc.h in a number of C files. Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano

list-objects-filter: remove OPT_PARSE_LIST_OBJECTS_FILTER_INIT()

2022-11-30T01:00:35Z

OPT_PARSE_LIST_OBJECTS_FILTER_INIT() with a non-NULL second argument passes a function pointer via an object pointer, which is undefined. It may work fine on platforms that implement C99 extension J.5.7 (Function pointer casts). Remove the unused macro and avoid the dependency on that extension. Signed-off-by: René Scharfe Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano

list-objects-filter: initialize sub-filter structs

2022-09-22T19:43:04Z

Since commit c54980ab83 (list-objects-filter: convert filter_spec to a strbuf, 2022-09-11), building with SANITIZE=undefined triggers an error in t5616. The problem is that we end up with a strbuf that has been zero-initialized instead of via STRBUF_INIT. Feeding that strbuf to strbuf_addbuf() in list_objects_filter_copy() means we will call memcpy like: memcpy(some_actual_buffer, NULL, 0); This works on most systems because we're copying zero bytes, but it is technically undefined behavior to ever pass NULL to memcpy. Even though c54980ab83 is where the bug manifests, that is only because we switched away from a string_list, which is OK with being zero-initialized (though it may cause other problems by not duplicating the strings, it happened to be OK in this instance). The actual bug is caused by the commit before that, 2a01bdedf8 (list-objects-filter: add and use initializers, 2022-09-11). There we consistently initialize the top-level filter structs, but we forgot the dynamically allocated ones we stick in filter_options->sub when creating combined filters. Note that we need to fix two spots here: where we parse a "combine:" filter, but also where we transform from a single-filter into a combined one after seeing multiple "--filter" options. In the second spot, we'll do some minor refactoring to avoid repeating our very-long array index. Signed-off-by: Jeff King Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano

list-objects-filter: convert filter_spec to a strbuf

2022-09-12T15:38:59Z

Originally, the filter_spec field was just a string pointer. In cf9ceb5a12 (list-objects-filter-options: make filter_spec a string_list, 2019-06-27) it became a string_list, but that commit notes: A strbuf would seem to be a more natural choice for this object, but it unfortunately requires initialization besides just zero'ing out the memory. This results in all container structs, and all containers of those structs, etc., to also require initialization. Initializing them all would be more cumbersome that simply using a string_list, which behaves properly when its contents are zero'd. Now that we've changed the struct to require non-zero initialization anyway (ironically, because string_list also needed non-zero initialization to avoid leaks), we can now convert to that more natural type. This makes the list_objects_filter_spec() function much less awkward, as it had to collapse the string_list to a single-entry list on the fly. Signed-off-by: Jeff King Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano

list-objects-filter: add and use initializers

2022-09-12T15:38:59Z

In 7e2619d8ff (list_objects_filter_options: plug leak of filter_spec strings, 2022-09-08), we noted that the filter_spec string_list was inconsistent in how it handled memory ownership of strings stored in the list. The fix there was a bit of a band-aid to set the "strdup_strings" variable right before adding anything. That works OK, and it lets the users of the API continue to zero-initialize the struct. But it makes the code a bit hard to follow and accident-prone, as any other spots appending the filter_spec need to think about whether to set the strdup_strings value, too (there's one such spot in partial_clone_get_default_filter_spec(), which is probably a possible memory leak). So let's do that full cleanup now. We'll introduce a LIST_OBJECTS_FILTER_INIT macro and matching function, and use them as appropriate (though it is for the "_options" struct, this matches the corresponding list_objects_filter_release() function). This is harder than it seems! Many other structs, like git_transport_data, embed the filter struct. So they need to initialize it themselves even if the rest of the enclosing struct is OK with zero-initialization. I found all of the relevant spots by grepping manually for declarations of list_objects_filter_options. And then doing so recursively for structs which embed it, and ones which embed those, and so on. I'm pretty sure I got everything, but there's no change that would alert the compiler if any topics in flight added new declarations. To catch this case, we now double-check in the parsing function that things were initialized as expected and BUG() if appropriate. Signed-off-by: Jeff King Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano

list-objects-filter: handle null default filter spec

2022-09-12T15:38:59Z

When we have a remote.*.promisor config variable, we know that we're in a partial clone. Usually there's a matching remote.*.partialclonefilter option, which tells us which filter to use with the remote. If that option is missing, we skip setting up the filter at all. But something funny happens: we stick a NULL entry into the string_list storing the text filter spec. This is a weird state, and could possibly segfault if anybody called called list_objects_filter_spec(), etc. In practice, nobody does, because filter->choice will still be LOFC_DISABLED, so code generally realizes there's no filter to use. And the string_list itself is OK, because it starts in non-dup mode until we actually parse a filter spec. So it blindly stores the NULL without even looking at it. But it's probably worth avoiding this confused state. It's an accident waiting to happen, and it will be a problem if we replace the lazy initialization from 7e2619d8ff (list_objects_filter_options: plug leak of filter_spec strings, 2022-09-08) with a real initialization function. The history is a little interesting here, as the bug was introduced during the merge resolution in 627b826834 (Merge branch 'md/list-objects-filter-combo', 2019-09-18). The original logic comes from cac1137dc4 (list-objects: check if filter is NULL before using, 2018-06-11), where we had a single string via core.partialCloneFilter, and a simple NULL check was sufficient. And it even added a test in t0410 that covers this situation. Later, that was expanded to allow per-remote filters in fa3d1b63e8 (promisor-remote: parse remote.*.partialclonefilter, 2019-06-25). After that commit, we get a promisor struct with a partial_clone_filter string, which could be NULL. The commit checks only that the struct pointer is non-NULL, which is enough. It may pass NULL to gently_parse_list_objects_filter(), but that function is smart enough to consider it a noop. But in parallel, cf9ceb5a12 (list-objects-filter-options: make filter_spec a string_list, 2019-06-27) added a new line of code: before we call gently_parse_list_objets_filter(), we append the filter spec to the string_list. By itself that was OK, since we'd have returned early if the string was NULL. When the two were merged in 627b826834, the result is that we return early only if the struct is NULL, but not the string. And we append to the string_list, meaning we may append NULL. The solution is to return early if either is NULL, as it would mean we don't have a configured filter. Signed-off-by: Jeff King Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano