Up until recently, object IDs did not have an algorithm member, only a
hash. Consequently, it was possible to share one null (all-zeros)
object ID among all hash algorithms. Now that we're going to be
handling objects from multiple hash algorithms, it's important to make
sure that all object IDs have a correct algorithm field.
Introduce a per-algorithm null OID, and add it to struct hash_algo.
Introduce a wrapper function as well, and use it everywhere we used to
use the null_oid constant.
Signed-off-by: brian m. carlson <sandals@crustytoothpaste.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The ort merge backend has been optimized by skipping irrelevant
renames.
* en/ort-perf-batch-9:
diffcore-rename: avoid doing basename comparisons for irrelevant sources
merge-ort: skip rename detection entirely if possible
merge-ort: use relevant_sources to filter possible rename sources
merge-ort: precompute whether directory rename detection is needed
merge-ort: introduce wrappers for alternate tree traversal
merge-ort: add data structures for an alternate tree traversal
merge-ort: precompute subset of sources for which we need rename detection
diffcore-rename: enable filtering possible rename sources
Rename detection rework continues.
* en/ort-perf-batch-8:
diffcore-rename: compute dir_rename_guess from dir_rename_counts
diffcore-rename: limit dir_rename_counts computation to relevant dirs
diffcore-rename: compute dir_rename_counts in stages
diffcore-rename: extend cleanup_dir_rename_info()
diffcore-rename: move dir_rename_counts into dir_rename_info struct
diffcore-rename: add function for clearing dir_rename_count
Move computation of dir_rename_count from merge-ort to diffcore-rename
diffcore-rename: add a mapping of destination names to their indices
diffcore-rename: provide basic implementation of idx_possible_rename()
diffcore-rename: use directory rename guided basename comparisons
Add and apply a semantic patch for converting code that open-codes
CALLOC_ARRAY to use it instead. It shortens the code and infers the
element size automatically.
Signed-off-by: René Scharfe <l.s.r@web.de>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
diffcore_rename_extended() will do a bunch of setup, then check for
exact renames, then abort before inexact rename detection if there are
no more sources or destinations that need to be matched. It will
sometimes be the case, however, that either
* we start with neither any sources or destinations
* we start with no *relevant* sources
In the first of these two cases, the setup and exact rename detection
will be very cheap since there are 0 files to operate on. In the second
case, it is quite possible to have thousands of files with none of the
source ones being relevant. Avoid calling diffcore_rename_extended() or
even some of the setup before diffcore_rename_extended() when we can
determine that rename detection is unnecessary.
For the testcases mentioned in commit 557ac0350d ("merge-ort: begin
performance work; instrument with trace2_region_* calls", 2020-10-28),
this change improves the performance as follows:
Before After
no-renames: 6.003 s ± 0.048 s 5.708 s ± 0.111 s
mega-renames: 114.009 s ± 0.236 s 102.171 s ± 0.440 s
just-one-mega: 3.489 s ± 0.017 s 3.471 s ± 0.015 s
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The past several commits determined conditions when rename sources might
be needed, and filled a relevant_sources strset with those paths. Pass
these along to diffcore_rename_extended() to use to limit the sources
that we need to detect renames for.
For the testcases mentioned in commit 557ac0350d ("merge-ort: begin
performance work; instrument with trace2_region_* calls", 2020-10-28),
this change improves the performance as follows:
Before After
no-renames: 12.596 s ± 0.061 s 6.003 s ± 0.048 s
mega-renames: 130.465 s ± 0.259 s 114.009 s ± 0.236 s
just-one-mega: 3.958 s ± 0.010 s 3.489 s ± 0.017 s
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
The point of directory rename detection is that if one side of history
renames a directory, and the other side adds new files under the old
directory, then the merge can move those new files into the new
directory. This leads to the following important observation:
* If the other side does not add any new files under the old
directory, we do not need to detect any renames for that directory.
Similarly, directory rename detection had an important requirement:
* If a directory still exists on one side of history, it has not been
renamed on that side of history. (See section 4 of t6423 or
Documentation/technical/directory-rename-detection.txt for more
details).
Using these two bits of information, we note that directory rename
detection is only needed in cases where (1) directories exist in the
merge base and on one side of history (i.e. dirmask == 3 or dirmask ==
5), and (2) where there is some new file added to that directory on the
side where it still exists (thus where the file has filemask == 2 or
filemask == 4, respectively). This has to be done in two steps, because
we have the dirmask when we are first considering the directory, and
won't get the filemasks for the files within it until we recurse into
that directory. So, we save
dir_rename_mask = dirmask - 1
when we hit a directory that is missing on one side, and then later look
for cases of
filemask == dir_rename_mask
One final note is that as soon as we hit a directory that needs
directory rename detection, we will need to detect renames in all
subdirectories of that directory as well due to the "majority rules"
decision when files are renamed into different directory hierarchies.
We arbitrarily use the special value of 0x07 to record when we've hit
such a directory.
The combination of all the above mean that we introduce a variable
named dir_rename_mask (couldn't think of a better name) which has one
of the following values as we traverse into a directory:
* 0x00: directory rename detection not needed
* 0x02 or 0x04: directory rename detection only needed if files added
* 0x07: directory rename detection definitely needed
We then pass this value through to add_pairs() so that it can mark
location_relevant as true only when dir_rename_mask is 0x07.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Add traverse_trees_wrapper() and traverse_trees_wrapper_callback()
functions. The former runs traverse_trees() with info->fn set to
traverse_trees_wrapper_callback, in order to simply save all the entries
without processing or recursing into any of them. This step allows
extra computation to be done (e.g. checking some condition across all
files) that can be used later. Then, after that is completed, it
iterates over all the saved entries and calls the original info->fn
callback with the saved data.
Currently, this does nothing more than marginally slowing down the tree
traversal since we do not take advantage of the opportunity to compute
anything special in traverse_trees_wrapper_callback(), and thus the real
callback will be called identically as it would have been without this
extra wrapper. However, a subsequent commit will add some special
computation of some values that the real callback will be able to use.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
In order to determine whether directory rename detection is needed, we
as a pre-requisite need a way to traverse through all the files in a
given tree before visiting any directories within that tree.
traverse_trees() only iterates through the entries in the order they
appear, so add some data structures that will store all the entries as
we iterate through them in traverse_trees(), which will allow us to
re-traverse them in our desired order.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
rename detection works by trying to pair all file deletions (or
"sources") with all file additions (or "destinations"), checking
similarity, and then marking the sufficiently similar ones as renames.
This can be expensive if there are many sources and destinations on a
given side of history as it results in an N x M comparison matrix.
However, there are many cases where we can compute in advance that
detecting renames for some of the sources provides no useful information
and thus that we can exclude those sources from the matrix.
To see why, first note that the merge machinery uses detected renames in
two ways:
* directory rename detection: when one side of history renames a
directory, and the other side of history adds new files to that
directory, we want to be able to warn the user about the need to
chose whether those new files stay in the old directory or move
to the new one.
* three-way content merging: in order to do three-way content merging
of files, we need three different file versions. If one side of
history renamed a file, then some of the content for the file is
found under a different path than in the merge base or on the
other side of history.
Add a simple testcase showing the two kinds of reasons renames are
relevant; it's a testcase that will only pass if we detect both kinds of
needed renames.
Other than the testcase added above, this commit concentrates just on
the three-way content merging; it will punt and mark all sources as
needed for directory rename detection, and leave it to future commits to
narrow that down more.
The point of three-way content merging is to reconcile changes made on
*both* sides of history. What if the file wasn't modified on both
sides? There are two possibilities:
* If it wasn't modified on the renamed side:
-> then we get to do exact rename detection, which is cheap.
* If it wasn't modified on the unrenamed side:
-> then detection of a rename for that source file is irrelevant
That latter claim might be surprising at first, so let's walk through a
case to show why rename detection for that source file is irrelevant.
Let's use two filenames, old.c & new.c, with the following abbreviated
object ids (and where the value '000000' is used to denote that the file
is missing in that commit):
old.c new.c
MERGE_BASE: 01d01d 000000
MERGE_SIDE1: 01d01d 000000
MERGE_SIDE2: 000000 5e1ec7
If the rename *isn't* detected:
then old.c looks like it was unmodified on one side and deleted on
the other and should thus be removed. new.c looks like a new file we
should keep as-is.
If the rename *is* detected:
then a three-way content merge is done. Since the version of the
file in MERGE_BASE and MERGE_SIDE1 are identical, the three-way merge
will produce exactly the version of the file whose abbreviated
object id is 5e1ec7. It will record that file at the path new.c,
while removing old.c from the directory.
Note that these two results are identical -- a single file named 'new.c'
with object id 5e1ec7. In other words, it doesn't matter if the rename
is detected in the case where the file is unmodified on the unrenamed
side.
Use this information to compute whether we need rename detection for
each source created in add_pair().
It's probably worth noting that there used to be a few other edge or
corner cases besides three-way content merges and directory rename
detection where lack of rename detection could have affected the result,
but those cases actually highlighted where conflict resolution methods
were not consistent with each other. Fixing those inconsistencies were
thus critically important to enabling this optimization. That work
involved the following:
* bringing consistency to add/add, rename/add, and rename/rename
conflict types, as done back in the topic merged at commit
ac193e0e0a ("Merge branch 'en/merge-path-collision'", 2019-01-04),
and further extended in commits 2a7c16c980 ("t6422, t6426: be more
flexible for add/add conflicts involving renames", 2020-08-10) and
e8eb99d4a6 ("t642[23]: be more flexible for add/add conflicts
involving pair renames", 2020-08-10)
* making rename/delete more consistent with modify/delete
as done in commits 1f3c9ba707 ("t6425: be more flexible with
rename/delete conflict messages", 2020-08-10) and 727c75b23f
("t6404, t6423: expect improved rename/delete handling in ort
backend", 2020-10-26)
Since the set of relevant_sources we compute has not yet been narrowed
down for directory rename detection, we do not pass it to
diffcore_rename_extended() yet. That will be done after subsequent
commits narrow down the list of relevant_sources needed for directory
rename detection reasons.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Add the ability to diffcore_rename_extended() to allow external callers
to declare that they only need renames detected for a subset of source
files, and use that information to skip detecting renames for them.
There are two important pieces to this optimization that may not be
obvious at first glance:
* We do not require callers to just filter the filepairs out
to remove the non-relevant sources, because exact rename detection
is fast and when it finds a match it can remove both a source and a
destination whereas the relevant_sources filter can only remove a
source.
* We need to filter out the source pairs in a preliminary pass instead
of adding a
strset_contains(relevant_sources, one->path)
check within the nested matrix loop. The reason for that is if we
have 30k renames, doing 30k * 30k = 900M strset_contains() calls
becomes extraordinarily expensive and defeats the performance gains
from this change; we only want to do 30k such calls instead.
If callers pass NULL for relevant_sources, that is special cases to
treat all sources as relevant. Since all callers currently pass NULL,
this optimization does not yet have any effect. Subsequent commits will
have merge-ort compute a set of relevant_sources to restrict which
sources we detect renames for, and have merge-ort pass that set of
relevant_sources to diffcore_rename_extended().
A note about filtering order:
Some may be curious why we don't filter out irrelevant sources at the
same time we filter out exact renames. While that technically could be
done at this point, there are two reasons to defer it:
First, was to reinforce a lesson that was too easy to forget. As I
mentioned above, in the past I filtered irrelevant sources out before
exact rename checking, and then discovered that exact renames' ability
to remove both sources and destinations was an important consideration
and thus doing the filtering after exact rename checking would speed
things up. Then at some point I realized that basename matching could
also remove both sources and destinations, and decided to put irrelevant
source filtering after basename filtering. That slowed things down a
lot. But, despite learning about this important ordering, in later
restructuring I forgot and made the same mistake of putting the
filtering after basename guided rename detection again. So, I have this
series of patches structured to do the irrelevant filtering last to
start to show how much extra it costs, and then add relevant filtering
in to find_basename_matches() to show how much it speeds things up.
Basically, it's a way to reinforce something that apparently was too
easy to forget, and make sure the commit messages record this lesson.
Second, the items in the "relevant_sources" in this patch series will
include all sources that *might be* relevant. It has to be conservative
and catch anything that might need a rename, but in the patch series
after this one we'll find ways to weed out more of the *might be*
relevant ones. Unfortunately, merge-ort does not have sufficient
information to weed those ones out, and there isn't enough information
at the time of filtering exact renames out to remove the extra ones
either. It has to be deferred. So the deferral is in part to simplify
some later additions.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
As we adjust the usage of dir_rename_count we want to have a function
for clearing, or partially clearing it out. Add a
partial_clear_dir_rename_count() function for this purpose.
Reviewed-by: Derrick Stolee <dstolee@microsoft.com>
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Move the computation of dir_rename_count from merge-ort.c to
diffcore-rename.c, making slight adjustments to the data structures
based on the move. While the diffstat looks large, viewing this commit
with --color-moved makes it clear that only about 20 lines changed.
With this patch, the computation of dir_rename_count is still only done
after inexact rename detection, but subsequent commits will add a
preliminary computation of dir_rename_count after exact rename
detection, followed by some updates after inexact rename detection.
Reviewed-by: Derrick Stolee <dstolee@microsoft.com>
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
We want to pass additional information to diffcore_rename() (or some
variant thereof) without plumbing that extra information through
diff_tree_oid() and diffcore_std(). Further, since we will need to
gather additional special information related to diffs and are walking
the trees anyway in collect_merge_info(), it seems odd to have
diff_tree_oid()/diffcore_std() repeat those tree walks. And there may
be times where we can avoid traversing into a subtree in
collect_merge_info() (based on additional information at our disposal),
that the basic diff logic would be unable to take advantage of. For all
these reasons, just create the add and delete pairs ourself and then
call diffcore_rename() directly.
This change is primarily about enabling future optimizations; the
advantage of avoiding extra tree traversals is small compared to the
cost of rename detection, and the advantage of avoiding the extra tree
traversals is somewhat offset by the extra time spent in
collect_merge_info() collecting the additional data anyway. However...
For the testcases mentioned in commit 557ac0350d ("merge-ort: begin
performance work; instrument with trace2_region_* calls", 2020-10-28),
this change improves the performance as follows:
Before After
no-renames: 13.294 s ± 0.103 s 12.775 s ± 0.062 s
mega-renames: 187.248 s ± 0.882 s 188.754 s ± 0.284 s
just-one-mega: 5.557 s ± 0.017 s 5.599 s ± 0.019 s
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Add some timing instrumentation for both merge-ort and diffcore-rename;
I used these to measure and optimize performance in both, and several
future patch series will build on these to reduce the timings of some
select testcases.
=== Setup ===
The primary testcase I used involved rebasing a random topic in the
linux kernel (consisting of 35 patches) against an older version. I
added two variants, one where I rename a toplevel directory, and another
where I only rebase one patch instead of the whole topic. The setup is
as follows:
$ git clone git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux-stable.git
$ git branch hwmon-updates fd8bdb23b91876ac1e624337bb88dc1dcc21d67e
$ git branch hwmon-just-one fd8bdb23b91876ac1e624337bb88dc1dcc21d67e~34
$ git branch base 4703d9119972bf586d2cca76ec6438f819ffa30e
$ git switch -c 5.4-renames v5.4
$ git mv drivers pilots # Introduce over 26,000 renames
$ git commit -m "Rename drivers/ to pilots/"
$ git config merge.renameLimit 30000
$ git config merge.directoryRenames true
=== Testcases ===
Now with REBASE standing for either "git rebase [--merge]" (using
merge-recursive) or "test-tool fast-rebase" (using merge-ort), the
testcases are:
Testcase #1: no-renames
$ git checkout v5.4^0
$ REBASE --onto HEAD base hwmon-updates
Note: technically the name is misleading; there are some renames, but
very few. Rename detection only takes about half the overall time.
Testcase #2: mega-renames
$ git checkout 5.4-renames^0
$ REBASE --onto HEAD base hwmon-updates
Testcase #3: just-one-mega
$ git checkout 5.4-renames^0
$ REBASE --onto HEAD base hwmon-just-one
=== Timing results ===
Overall timings, using hyperfine (1 warmup run, 3 runs for mega-renames,
10 runs for the other two cases):
merge-recursive merge-ort
no-renames: 18.912 s ± 0.174 s 14.263 s ± 0.053 s
mega-renames: 5964.031 s ± 10.459 s 5504.231 s ± 5.150 s
just-one-mega: 149.583 s ± 0.751 s 158.534 s ± 0.498 s
A single re-run of each with some breakdowns:
--- no-renames ---
merge-recursive merge-ort
overall runtime: 19.302 s 14.257 s
inexact rename detection: 7.603 s 7.906 s
everything else: 11.699 s 6.351 s
--- mega-renames ---
merge-recursive merge-ort
overall runtime: 5950.195 s 5499.672 s
inexact rename detection: 5746.309 s 5487.120 s
everything else: 203.886 s 17.552 s
--- just-one-mega ---
merge-recursive merge-ort
overall runtime: 151.001 s 158.582 s
inexact rename detection: 143.448 s 157.835 s
everything else: 7.553 s 0.747 s
=== Timing observations ===
0) Maximum speedup
The "everything else" row represents the maximum speedup we could
achieve if we were to somehow infinitely parallelize inexact rename
detection, but leave everything else alone. The fact that this is so
much smaller than the real runtime (even in the case with virtually no
renames) makes it clear just how overwhelmingly large the time spent on
rename detection can be.
1) no-renames
1a) merge-ort is faster than merge-recursive, which is nice. However,
this still should not be considered good enough. Although the "merge"
backend to rebase (merge-recursive) is sometimes faster than the "apply"
backend, this is one of those cases where it is not. In fact, even
merge-ort is slower. The "apply" backend can complete this testcase in
6.940 s ± 0.485 s
which is about 2x faster than merge-ort and 3x faster than
merge-recursive. One goal of the merge-ort performance work will be to
make it faster than git-am on this (and similar) testcases.
2) mega-renames
2a) Obviously rename detection is a huge cost; it's where most the time
is spent. We need to cut that down. If we could somehow infinitely
parallelize it and drive its time to 0, the merge-recursive time would
drop to about 204s, and the merge-ort time would drop to about 17s. I
think this particular stat shows I've subtly baked a couple performance
improvements into merge-ort and into fast-rebase already.
3) just-one-mega
3a) not much to say here, it just gives some flavor for how rebasing
only one patch compares to rebasing 35.
=== Goals ===
This patch is obviously just the beginning. Here are some of my goals
that this measurement will help us achieve:
* Drive the cost of rename detection down considerably for merges
* After the above has been achieved, see if there are other slowness
factors (which would have previously been overshadowed by rename
detection costs) which we can then focus on and also optimize.
* Ensure our rebase testcase that requires little rename detection
is noticeably faster with merge-ort than with apply-based rebase.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Acked-by: Taylor Blau <ttaylorr@github.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
get_provisional_directory_renames() has code to detect directories being
evenly split between different locations. However, as noted previously,
if there are no new files added to that directory that was split evenly,
our inability to determine where the directory was renamed to doesn't
matter since there are no new files to try to move into the new
location. Unfortunately, that code is unaware of whether there are new
files under the directory in question and we just ignore that, causing
us to fail t6423 test 2b but pass test 2a; turn off the error for now,
swapping which tests pass and fail.
The motivating reason for switching this off as a temporary measure is
that as we add optimizations, we'll start looking at only subsets of
renames, and subsets of renames can start switching the result we get
when this error is (wrongly) on. Once we get enough optimizations,
however, we can prevent that code from even running when there are no
new files added to the relevant directory, at which point we can revert
this commit and then both testcases 2a and 2b will pass simultaneously.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
When a series of merges was performed (such as for a rebase or series of
cherry-picks), only the data structures allocated by the final merge
operation were being freed. The problem was that while picking out
pieces of merge-ort to upstream, I previously misread a certain section
of merge_start() and assumed it was associated with a later
optimization. Include that section now, which ensures that if there was
a previous merge operation, that we clear out result->priv and then
re-use it for opt->priv, and otherwise we allocate opt->priv.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
* en/ort-directory-rename: (28 commits)
merge-ort: fix a directory rename detection bug
merge-ort: process_renames() now needs more defensiveness
merge-ort: implement apply_directory_rename_modifications()
merge-ort: add a new toplevel_dir field
merge-ort: implement handle_path_level_conflicts()
merge-ort: implement check_for_directory_rename()
merge-ort: implement apply_dir_rename() and check_dir_renamed()
merge-ort: implement compute_collisions()
merge-ort: modify collect_renames() for directory rename handling
merge-ort: implement handle_directory_level_conflicts()
merge-ort: implement compute_rename_counts()
merge-ort: copy get_renamed_dir_portion() from merge-recursive.c
merge-ort: add outline of get_provisional_directory_renames()
merge-ort: add outline for computing directory renames
merge-ort: collect which directories are removed in dirs_removed
merge-ort: initialize and free new directory rename data structures
merge-ort: add new data structures for directory rename detection
merge-ort: add implementation of type-changed rename handling
merge-ort: add implementation of normal rename handling
merge-ort: add implementation of rename collisions
...
As noted in commit 902c521a35 ("t6423: more involved directory rename
test", 2020-10-15), when we have a case where
* dir/subdir/ has several files
* almost all files in dir/subdir/ are renamed to folder/subdir/
* one of the files in dir/subdir/ is renamed to folder/subdir/newsubdir/
* the other side of history (that doesn't do the renames) adds a
new file to dir/subdir/
Then for the majority of the file renames, the directory rename of
dir/subdir/ -> folder/subdir/
is actually not represented that way but as
dir/ -> folder/
We also had one rename that was represented as
dir/subdir/ -> folder/subdir/newsubdir/
Now, since there's a new file in dir/subdir/, where does it go? Well,
there's only one rule for dir/subdir/, so the code previously noted that
this rule had the "majority" of the one "relevant" rename and thus
erroneously used it to place the file in folder/subdir/newsubdir/. We
really want the heavy weight associated with dir/ -> folder/ to also be
treated as dir/subdir/ -> folder/subdir/, so that we correctly place the
file in folder/subdir/.
Add a bunch of logic to make sure that we use all relevant renamings in
directory rename detection.
Note that testcase 12f of t6423 still fails after this, but it gets
further than merge-recursive does. There are some performance related
bits in that testcase (the region_enter messages) that do not yet
succeed, but the rest of the testcase works after this patch.
Subsequent patch series will fix up the performance side.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Since directory rename detection adds new paths to opt->priv->paths and
removes old ones, process_renames() needs to now check whether
pair->one->path actually exists in opt->priv->paths instead of just
assuming it does.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
This function roughly follows the same outline as the function of the
same name from merge-recursive.c, but the code diverges in multiple
ways due to some special considerations:
* merge-ort's version needs to update opt->priv->paths with any new
paths (and opt->priv->paths points to struct conflict_infos which
track quite a bit of metadata for each path); merge-recursive's
version would directly update the index
* merge-ort requires that opt->priv->paths has any leading directories
of any relevant files also be included in the set of paths. And
due to pointer equality requirements on merged_info.directory_name,
we have to be careful how we compute and insert these.
* due to the above requirements on opt->priv->paths, merge-ort's
version starts with a long comment to explain all the special
considerations that need to be handled
* merge-ort can use the full data stored in opt->priv->paths to avoid
making expensive get_tree_entry() calls to regather the necessary
data.
* due to messages being deferred automatically in merge-ort, this is
the best place to handle conflict messages whereas in
merge-recursive.c they are deferred manually so that processing of
entries does all the printing
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Due to the string-equality-iff-pointer-equality requirements placed on
merged_info.directory_name, apply_directory_rename_modifications() will
need to have access to the exact toplevel directory name string pointer
and can't just use a new empty string. Store it in a field that we can
use.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
This is copied from merge-recursive.c, with minor tweaks due to:
* using strmap API
* merge-ort not using the non_unique_new_dir field, since it'll
obviate its need entirely later with performance improvements
* adding a new path_in_way() function that uses opt->priv->paths
instead of doing an expensive tree_has_path() lookup to see if
a tree has a given path.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
This is copied from merge-recursive.c, with minor tweaks due to using strmap
API and the fact that it can use opt->priv->paths to get all pathnames that
exist instead of taking a tree object.
This depends on a new function, handle_path_level_conflicts(), which
just has a placeholder die-not-yet-implemented implementation for now; a
subsequent patch will implement it.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Both of these are copied from merge-recursive.c, with just minor tweaks
due to using strmap API and not having a non_unique_new_dir field.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
This is nearly a wholesale copy of compute_collisions() from
merge-recursive.c, and the logic remains the same, but it has been
tweaked slightly due to:
* using strmap.h API (instead of direct hashmaps)
* allocation/freeing of data structures were done separately in
merge_start() and clear_or_reinit_internal_opts() in an earlier
patch in this series
* there is no non_unique_new_dir data field in merge-ort; that will
be handled a different way
It does depend on two new functions, apply_dir_rename() and
check_dir_renamed() which were introduced with simple
die-not-yet-implemented shells and will be implemented in subsequent
patches.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
collect_renames() is similar to merge-recursive.c's get_renames(), but
lacks the directory rename handling found in the latter. Port that code
structure over to merge-ort. This introduces three new
die-not-yet-implemented functions that will be defined in future
commits.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
This is modelled on the version of handle_directory_level_conflicts()
from merge-recursive.c, but is massively simplified due to the following
factors:
* strmap API provides simplifications over using direct hashmap
* we have a dirs_removed field in struct rename_info that we have an
easy way to populate from collect_merge_info(); this was already
used in compute_rename_counts() and thus we do not need to check
for condition #2.
* The removal of condition #2 by handling it earlier in the code also
obviates the need to check for condition #3 -- if both sides renamed
a directory, meaning that the directory no longer exists on either
side, then neither side could have added any new files to that
directory, and thus there are no files whose locations we need to
move due to such a directory rename.
In fact, the same logic that makes condition #3 irrelevant means
condition #1 is also irrelevant so we could drop this function.
However, it is cheap to check if both sides rename the same directory,
and doing so can save future computation. So, simply remove any
directories that both sides renamed from the list of directory renames.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
This function is based on the first half of get_directory_renames() from
merge-recursive.c; as part of the implementation, factor out a routine,
increment_count(), to update the bookkeeping to track the number of
items renamed into new directories.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
This function is based on merge-recursive.c's get_directory_renames(),
except that the first half has been split out into a not-yet-implemented
compute_rename_counts(). The primary difference here is our lack of the
non_unique_new_dir boolean in our strmap. The lack of that field will
at first cause us to fail testcase 2b of t6423; however, future
optimizations will obviate the need for that ugly field so we have just
left it out.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Port some directory rename handling changes from merge-recursive.c's
detect_and_process_renames() to the same-named function of merge-ort.c.
This does not yet add any use or handling of directory renames, just the
outline for where we start to compute them. Thus, a future patch will
add port additional changes to merge-ort's detect_and_process_renames().
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
* en/ort-conflict-handling:
merge-ort: add handling for different types of files at same path
merge-ort: copy find_first_merges() implementation from merge-recursive.c
merge-ort: implement format_commit()
merge-ort: copy and adapt merge_submodule() from merge-recursive.c
merge-ort: copy and adapt merge_3way() from merge-recursive.c
merge-ort: flesh out implementation of handle_content_merge()
merge-ort: handle book-keeping around two- and three-way content merge
merge-ort: implement unique_path() helper
merge-ort: handle directory/file conflicts that remain
merge-ort: handle D/F conflict where directory disappears due to merge
Add some handling that explicitly considers collisions of the following
types:
* file/submodule
* file/symlink
* submodule/symlink
Leaving them as conflicts at the same path are hard for users to
resolve, so move one or both of them aside so that they each get their
own path.
Note that in the case of recursive handling (i.e. call_depth > 0), we
can just use the merge base of the two merge bases as the merge result
much like we do with modify/delete conflicts, binary files, conflicting
submodule values, and so on.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Code is identical for the function body in the two files, the call
signature is just slightly different in merge-ort than merge-recursive
as noted a couple commits ago.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
This implementation is based on a mixture of print_commit() and
output_commit_title() from merge-recursive.c so that it can be used to
take over both functions.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Take merge_submodule() from merge-recursive.c and make slight
adjustments, predominantly around deferring output using path_msg()
instead of using merge-recursive's output() and show() functions.
There's also a fix for recursive cases (when call_depth > 0) and a
slight change to argument order for find_first_merges().
find_first_merges() and format_commit() are left unimplemented for
now, but will be added by subsequent commits.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Take merge_3way() from merge-recursive.c and make slight adjustments
based on different data structures (direct usage of object_id
rather diff_filespec, separate pathnames which based on our careful
interning of pathnames in opt->priv->paths can be compared with '!='
rather than 'strcmp').
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
This implementation is based heavily on merge_mode_and_contents() from
merge-recursive.c, though it has some fixes for recursive merges (i.e.
when call_depth > 0), and has a number of changes throughout based on
slight differences in data structures and in how the functions are
called.
It is, however, based on two new helper functions -- merge_3way() and
merge_submodule -- for which we only provide die-not-implemented stubs
at this point. Future commits will add implementations of these
functions.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
In addition to the content merge (which will go in a subsequent commit),
we need to worry about conflict messages, placing results in higher
order stages in case of a df_conflict, and making sure the results are
placed in ci->merged.result so that they will show up in the working
tree. Take care of all that external book-keeping, moving the
simplistic just-take-HEAD code into the barebones handle_content_merge()
function for now. Subsequent commits will flesh out
handle_content_merge().
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Implement unique_path(), based on the one from merge-recursive.c. It is
simplified, however, due to: (1) using strmaps, and (2) the fact that
merge-ort lets the checkout codepath handle possible collisions with the
working tree means that other code locations don't have to.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
When a directory/file conflict remains, we can leave the directory where
it is, but need to move the information about the file to a different
pathname. After moving the file to a different pathname, we allow
subsequent process_entry() logic to handle any additional details that
might be relevant.
This depends on a new helper function, unique_path(), that dies with an
unimplemented error currently but will be implemented in a subsequent
commit.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
When one side has a directory at a given path and the other side of
history has a file at the path, but the merge resolves the directory
away (e.g. because no path within that directory was modified and the
other side deleted it, or because renaming moved all the files
elsewhere), then we don't actually have a conflict anymore. We just
need to clear away any information related to the relevant directory,
and then the subsequent process_entry() handling can handle the given
path.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Implement merge_incore_recursive(), mostly through the use of a new
helper function, merge_ort_internal(), which itself is based off
merge_recursive_internal() from merge-recursive.c.
This drops the number of failures in the testsuite when run under
GIT_TEST_MERGE_ALGORITHM=ort from around 1500 to 647.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
In order to handle recursive merges, after merging merge-bases we need
to clear away most of the data we had built up but some of it needs to
be kept -- in particular the "output" field. Rename the function to
reflect its future change in use.
Further, since "reinitialize" means we'll be reusing the fields
immediately, take advantage of this to only partially clear maps,
leaving the hashtable allocated and pre-sized. (This may be slightly
out-of-order since the speedups aren't realized until there are far
more strmaps in use, but the patch submission process already went out
of order because of various questions and requests for strmap. Anyway,
see commit 6ccdfc2a20 ("strmap: enable faster clearing and reusing of
strmaps", 2020-11-05), for performance details about the use of
strmap_partial_clear().)
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
In a subsequent commit, we will implement the traditional recursiveness
that gave merge-recursive its name, namely merging non-unique
merge-bases to come up with a single virtual merge base. Copy a few
helper functions from merge-recursive.c that we will use in the
implementation.
Signed-off-by: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
brian m. carlson
Junio C Hamano
René Scharfe
Elijah Newren