view tests/test-issue522.t @ 49000:dd6b67d5c256 stable

rust: fix unsound `OwningDirstateMap` As per the previous patch, `OwningDirstateMap` is unsound. Self-referential structs are difficult to implement correctly in Rust since the compiler is free to move structs around as much as it wants to. They are also very rarely needed in practice, so the state-of-the-art on how they should be done within the Rust rules is still a bit new. The crate `ouroboros` is an attempt at providing a safe way (in the Rust sense) of declaring self-referential structs. It is getting a lot attention and was improved very quickly when soundness issues were found in the past: rather than relying on our own (limited) review circle, we might as well use the de-facto common crate to fix this problem. This will give us a much better chance of finding issues should any new ones be discovered as well as the benefit of fewer `unsafe` APIs of our own. I was starting to think about how I would present a safe API to the old struct but soon realized that the callback-based approach was already done in `ouroboros`, along with a lot more care towards refusing incorrect structs. In short: we don't return a mutable reference to the `DirstateMap` anymore, we expect users of its API to pass a `FnOnce` that takes the map as an argument. This allows our `OwningDirstateMap` to control the input and output lifetimes of the code that modifies it to prevent such issues. Changing to `ouroboros` meant changing every API with it, but it is relatively low churn in the end. It correctly identified the example buggy modification of `copy_map_insert` outlined in the previous patch as violating the borrow rules. Differential Revision: https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D12429
author Raphaël Gomès <rgomes@octobus.net>
date Tue, 05 Apr 2022 10:55:28 +0200
parents baf3fe2977cc
children ccd76e292be5
line wrap: on
line source

https://bz.mercurial-scm.org/522

In the merge below, the file "foo" has the same contents in both
parents, but if we look at the file-level history, we'll notice that
the version in p1 is an ancestor of the version in p2. This test makes
sure that we'll use the version from p2 in the manifest of the merge
revision.

  $ hg init

  $ echo foo > foo
  $ hg ci -qAm 'add foo'

  $ echo bar >> foo
  $ hg ci -m 'change foo'

  $ hg backout -r tip -m 'backout changed foo'
  reverting foo
  changeset 2:4d9e78aaceee backs out changeset 1:b515023e500e

  $ hg up -C 0
  1 files updated, 0 files merged, 0 files removed, 0 files unresolved

  $ touch bar
  $ hg ci -qAm 'add bar'

  $ hg merge --debug
  resolving manifests
   branchmerge: True, force: False, partial: False
   ancestor: bbd179dfa0a7, local: 71766447bdbb+, remote: 4d9e78aaceee
   foo: remote is newer -> g
  getting foo
  1 files updated, 0 files merged, 0 files removed, 0 files unresolved
  (branch merge, don't forget to commit)

  $ hg debugstate | grep foo
  m   0         -2 unset               foo

  $ hg st -A foo
  M foo

  $ hg ci -m 'merge'

  $ hg manifest --debug | grep foo
  c6fc755d7e68f49f880599da29f15add41f42f5a 644   foo

  $ hg debugindex foo
     rev linkrev nodeid       p1           p2
       0       0 2ed2a3912a0b 000000000000 000000000000
       1       1 6f4310b00b9a 2ed2a3912a0b 000000000000
       2       2 c6fc755d7e68 6f4310b00b9a 000000000000