Mercurial > hg
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