mirrors/git
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/git/git.git synced 2024-11-16 22:14:53 +01:00
Code Activity
git/lockfile.c

75 lines
1.5 KiB
C
Raw Normal View History

Make index file locking code reusable to others. The framework to create lockfiles that are removed at exit is first used to reliably write the index file, but it is applicable to other things, so stop calling it "cache_file". This also rewords a few remaining error message that called the index file "cache file". Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
2006-06-06 21:51:49 +02:00
/*
* Copyright (c) 2005, Junio C Hamano
*/
#include "cache.h"
static struct lock_file *lock_file_list;
static void remove_lock_file(void)
{
while (lock_file_list) {
if (lock_file_list->filename[0])
unlink(lock_file_list->filename);
lock_file_list = lock_file_list->next;
}
}
static void remove_lock_file_on_signal(int signo)
{
remove_lock_file();
signal(SIGINT, SIG_DFL);
raise(signo);
}
Better error message when we are unable to lock the index file Most of the callers except the one in refs.c use the function to update the index file. Among the index writers, everybody except write-tree dies if they cannot open it for writing. This gives the function an extra argument, to tell it to die when it cannot create a new file as the lockfile. The only caller that does not have to die is write-tree, because updating the index for the cache-tree part is optional and not being able to do so does not affect the correctness. I think we do not have to be so careful and make the failure into die() the same way as other callers, but that would be a different patch. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
2006-08-12 10:03:47 +02:00
static int lock_file(struct lock_file *lk, const char *path)
Make index file locking code reusable to others. The framework to create lockfiles that are removed at exit is first used to reliably write the index file, but it is applicable to other things, so stop calling it "cache_file". This also rewords a few remaining error message that called the index file "cache file". Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
2006-06-06 21:51:49 +02:00
{
int fd;
sprintf(lk->filename, "%s.lock", path);
fd = open(lk->filename, O_RDWR | O_CREAT | O_EXCL, 0666);
shared repository - add a few missing calls to adjust_shared_perm(). There were a few calls to adjust_shared_perm() that were missing: - init-db creates refs, refs/heads, and refs/tags before reading from templates that could specify sharedrepository in the config file; - updating config file created it under user's umask without adjusting; - updating refs created it under user's umask without adjusting; - switching branches created .git/HEAD under user's umask without adjusting. This moves adjust_shared_perm() from sha1_file.c to path.c, since a few SIMPLE_PROGRAM need to call repository configuration functions which in turn need to call adjust_shared_perm(). sha1_file.c needs to link with SHA1 computation library which is usually not linked to SIMPLE_PROGRAM. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
2006-06-10 07:07:23 +02:00
if (0 <= fd) {
Fix infinite loop when deleting multiple packed refs. It was stupid to link the same element twice to lock_file_list and end up in a loop, so we certainly need a fix. But it is not like we are taking a lock on multiple files in this case. It is just that we leave the linked element on the list even after commit_lock_file() successfully removes the cruft. We cannot remove the list element in commit_lock_file(); if we are interrupted in the middle of list manipulation, the call to remove_lock_file_on_signal() will happen with a broken list structure pointed by lock_file_list, which would cause the cruft to remain, so not removing the list element is the right thing to do. Instead we should be reusing the element already on the list. There is already a code for that in lock_file() function in lockfile.c. The code checks lk->next and the element is linked only when it is not already on the list -- which is incorrect for the last element on the list (which has NULL in its next field), but if you read the check as "is this element already on the list?" it actually makes sense. We do not want to link it on the list again, nor we would want to set up signal/atexit over and over. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
2007-01-02 20:19:05 +01:00
if (!lk->on_list) {
shared repository - add a few missing calls to adjust_shared_perm(). There were a few calls to adjust_shared_perm() that were missing: - init-db creates refs, refs/heads, and refs/tags before reading from templates that could specify sharedrepository in the config file; - updating config file created it under user's umask without adjusting; - updating refs created it under user's umask without adjusting; - switching branches created .git/HEAD under user's umask without adjusting. This moves adjust_shared_perm() from sha1_file.c to path.c, since a few SIMPLE_PROGRAM need to call repository configuration functions which in turn need to call adjust_shared_perm(). sha1_file.c needs to link with SHA1 computation library which is usually not linked to SIMPLE_PROGRAM. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
2006-06-10 07:07:23 +02:00
lk->next = lock_file_list;
lock_file_list = lk;
Fix infinite loop when deleting multiple packed refs. It was stupid to link the same element twice to lock_file_list and end up in a loop, so we certainly need a fix. But it is not like we are taking a lock on multiple files in this case. It is just that we leave the linked element on the list even after commit_lock_file() successfully removes the cruft. We cannot remove the list element in commit_lock_file(); if we are interrupted in the middle of list manipulation, the call to remove_lock_file_on_signal() will happen with a broken list structure pointed by lock_file_list, which would cause the cruft to remain, so not removing the list element is the right thing to do. Instead we should be reusing the element already on the list. There is already a code for that in lock_file() function in lockfile.c. The code checks lk->next and the element is linked only when it is not already on the list -- which is incorrect for the last element on the list (which has NULL in its next field), but if you read the check as "is this element already on the list?" it actually makes sense. We do not want to link it on the list again, nor we would want to set up signal/atexit over and over. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
2007-01-02 20:19:05 +01:00
lk->on_list = 1;
}
if (lock_file_list) {
shared repository - add a few missing calls to adjust_shared_perm(). There were a few calls to adjust_shared_perm() that were missing: - init-db creates refs, refs/heads, and refs/tags before reading from templates that could specify sharedrepository in the config file; - updating config file created it under user's umask without adjusting; - updating refs created it under user's umask without adjusting; - switching branches created .git/HEAD under user's umask without adjusting. This moves adjust_shared_perm() from sha1_file.c to path.c, since a few SIMPLE_PROGRAM need to call repository configuration functions which in turn need to call adjust_shared_perm(). sha1_file.c needs to link with SHA1 computation library which is usually not linked to SIMPLE_PROGRAM. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
2006-06-10 07:07:23 +02:00
signal(SIGINT, remove_lock_file_on_signal);
atexit(remove_lock_file);
}
if (adjust_shared_perm(lk->filename))
return error("cannot fix permission bits on %s",
lk->filename);
Make index file locking code reusable to others. The framework to create lockfiles that are removed at exit is first used to reliably write the index file, but it is applicable to other things, so stop calling it "cache_file". This also rewords a few remaining error message that called the index file "cache file". Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
2006-06-06 21:51:49 +02:00
}
Fix infinite loop when deleting multiple packed refs. It was stupid to link the same element twice to lock_file_list and end up in a loop, so we certainly need a fix. But it is not like we are taking a lock on multiple files in this case. It is just that we leave the linked element on the list even after commit_lock_file() successfully removes the cruft. We cannot remove the list element in commit_lock_file(); if we are interrupted in the middle of list manipulation, the call to remove_lock_file_on_signal() will happen with a broken list structure pointed by lock_file_list, which would cause the cruft to remain, so not removing the list element is the right thing to do. Instead we should be reusing the element already on the list. There is already a code for that in lock_file() function in lockfile.c. The code checks lk->next and the element is linked only when it is not already on the list -- which is incorrect for the last element on the list (which has NULL in its next field), but if you read the check as "is this element already on the list?" it actually makes sense. We do not want to link it on the list again, nor we would want to set up signal/atexit over and over. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
2007-01-02 20:19:05 +01:00
else
lk->filename[0] = 0;
Make index file locking code reusable to others. The framework to create lockfiles that are removed at exit is first used to reliably write the index file, but it is applicable to other things, so stop calling it "cache_file". This also rewords a few remaining error message that called the index file "cache file". Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
2006-06-06 21:51:49 +02:00
return fd;
}
Better error message when we are unable to lock the index file Most of the callers except the one in refs.c use the function to update the index file. Among the index writers, everybody except write-tree dies if they cannot open it for writing. This gives the function an extra argument, to tell it to die when it cannot create a new file as the lockfile. The only caller that does not have to die is write-tree, because updating the index for the cache-tree part is optional and not being able to do so does not affect the correctness. I think we do not have to be so careful and make the failure into die() the same way as other callers, but that would be a different patch. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
2006-08-12 10:03:47 +02:00
int hold_lock_file_for_update(struct lock_file *lk, const char *path, int die_on_error)
{
int fd = lock_file(lk, path);
if (fd < 0 && die_on_error)
Print a more accurate error message when we fail to create a lock file. Signed-off-by: Steven Grimm <koreth@midwinter.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
2007-01-06 04:14:04 +01:00
die("unable to create '%s.lock': %s", path, strerror(errno));
Better error message when we are unable to lock the index file Most of the callers except the one in refs.c use the function to update the index file. Among the index writers, everybody except write-tree dies if they cannot open it for writing. This gives the function an extra argument, to tell it to die when it cannot create a new file as the lockfile. The only caller that does not have to die is write-tree, because updating the index for the cache-tree part is optional and not being able to do so does not affect the correctness. I think we do not have to be so careful and make the failure into die() the same way as other callers, but that would be a different patch. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
2006-08-12 10:03:47 +02:00
return fd;
}
Make index file locking code reusable to others. The framework to create lockfiles that are removed at exit is first used to reliably write the index file, but it is applicable to other things, so stop calling it "cache_file". This also rewords a few remaining error message that called the index file "cache file". Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
2006-06-06 21:51:49 +02:00
int commit_lock_file(struct lock_file *lk)
{
char result_file[PATH_MAX];
int i;
strcpy(result_file, lk->filename);
i = strlen(result_file) - 5; /* .lock */
result_file[i] = 0;
i = rename(lk->filename, result_file);
lk->filename[0] = 0;
return i;
}
void rollback_lock_file(struct lock_file *lk)
{
if (lk->filename[0])
unlink(lk->filename);
lk->filename[0] = 0;
}
Copy permalink