At Wed, 21 Sep 2016 15:20:39 +0900,
FUJIWARA Katsunori wrote:
> 
> At Tue, 20 Sep 2016 18:12:58 +0200,
> Pierre-Yves David wrote:
> > 
> > On 09/16/2016 10:51 PM, FUJIWARA Katsunori wrote:
> > > # HG changeset patch
> > > # User FUJIWARA Katsunori <fo...@lares.dti.ne.jp>
> > > # Date 1474057495 -32400
> > > #      Sat Sep 17 05:24:55 2016 +0900
> > > # Node ID 71b6b49f8a7ab6c894028b9153290f4bbf0f54f6
> > > # Parent  ad999fb789fcb86b11c98334ab98b31a17ee2d25
> > > vfs: use checkambigatclosing in checkambig=True but atomictemp=False case
> > >
> > > In Mercurial source tree, opening a file in "a"/"a+" mode like below
> > > doesn't specify atomictemp=True for vfs, and this avoids file stat
> > > ambiguity check by atomictempfile.
> > >
> > >   - writing changes out in revlog layer uses "a+" mode
> > >   - truncation in repair.strip() uses "a" mode
> > >   - truncation in transaction._playback() uses "a" mode
> > >
> > > If steps below occurs at "the same time in sec", all of mtime, ctime
> > > and size are same between (1) and (3).
> > >
> > >   1. append data to revlog-style file (and close transaction)
> > >   2. discard appended data by truncation (strip or rollback)
> > >   3. append same size but different data to revlog-style file again
> > >
> > > Therefore, cache validation doesn't work after (3) as expected.
> > >
> > > This patch uses checkambigatclosing in checkambig=True but
> > > atomictemp=False case, to check (and get rid of) file stat ambiguity
> > > at closing.
> > >
> > > This is a part of ExactCacheValidationPlan.
> > >
> > >     https://www.mercurial-scm.org/wiki/ExactCacheValidationPlan
> > >
> > > diff --git a/mercurial/scmutil.py b/mercurial/scmutil.py
> > > --- a/mercurial/scmutil.py
> > > +++ b/mercurial/scmutil.py
> > > @@ -587,6 +587,10 @@ class vfs(abstractvfs):
> > >          if nlink == 0:
> > >              self._fixfilemode(f)
> > >
> > > +        if checkambig:
> > > +            assert mode not in ('r', 'rb'), "valid only at writing"
> > > +            fp = checkambigatclosing(fp)
> > 
> > It sound a bit too much like a real logic check with assert. Instead we 
> > should probably either:
> > - have a hard check with an abort.
> > - ignore the bad state with a devel warning (probably the best).
> 
> OK, I'll send revised one with the latter.

Oops, I forgot that vfs doesn't have any reference path to ui object :-<

Should we raise Abort('implementation error: mode %s is not valid for
checkambig=True') or so ? (or ignore bad state silently ?)

> 
> > Cheers,
> > 
> > -- 
> > Pierre-Yves David
> > 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> [FUJIWARA Katsunori]                             fo...@lares.dti.ne.jp
> _______________________________________________
> Mercurial-devel mailing list
> Mercurial-devel@mercurial-scm.org
> https://www.mercurial-scm.org/mailman/listinfo/mercurial-devel

----------------------------------------------------------------------
[FUJIWARA Katsunori]                             fo...@lares.dti.ne.jp
_______________________________________________
Mercurial-devel mailing list
Mercurial-devel@mercurial-scm.org
https://www.mercurial-scm.org/mailman/listinfo/mercurial-devel

Reply via email to