##// END OF EJS Templates
copies: calculate mergecopies() based on pathcopies()...
copies: calculate mergecopies() based on pathcopies() When copies are stored in changesets, we need a changeset-centric version of mergecopies() just like we have a changeset-centric version of pathcopies(). I think the natural way of thinking about mergecopies() is in terms of pathcopies() from the base to each of the commits. So if we can rewrite mergecopies() based on two such pathcopies() calls, we'll get the changeset-centric version for free. That's what this patch does. A nice bonus is that it ends up being a lot simpler. mergecopies() has accumulated a lot of technical debt over time. One good example is the code for dealing with grafts (the "partial/incomplete/dirty" stuff). Since pathcopies() already deals with backwards renames and ping-pong renames, we get that for free. I've run tests with hard-coded debug logging for "fullcopy" and while I haven't looked at every difference it produces, all the ones I have looked at seemed reasonable to me. I'm a little surprised that no more tests fail when run with '--extra-config-opt experimental.copies.read-from=compatibility' compared to before this patch. This patch also fixes the broken cases in test-annotate.t and test-fastannotate.t. It also enables the part of test-copies.t that was previously disabled exactly because mergecopies() needed to get a changeset-centric version. One drawback of the rewritten code is that we may now make remotefilelog prefetch more files. We used to prefetch files that were unique to either side of the merge compared to the other. We now prefetch files that are unique to either side of the merge compared to the base. This means that if you added the same file to each side, we would not prefetch it before, but we would now. Such cases are probably quite rare, but one likely scenario where they happen is when moving from a commit to its successor (or the other way around). The user will probably already have the files in the cache in such cases, so it's probably not a big deal. Some timings for calculating mergecopies between two revisions (revisions shown on each line, all using the common ancestor as base): In the hg repo: 4.8 4.9: 0.21s -> 0.21s 4.0 4.8: 0.35s -> 0.63s In and old copy of the mozilla-unified repo: FIREFOX_BETA_60_BASE^ FIREFOX_BETA_60_BASE: 0.82s -> 0.82s FIREFOX_NIGHTLY_59_END FIREFOX_BETA_60_BASE: 2.5s -> 2.6s FIREFOX_BETA_59_END FIREFOX_BETA_60_BASE: 3.9s -> 4.1s FIREFOX_AURORA_50_BASE FIREFOX_BETA_60_BASE: 31s -> 33s So it's measurably slower in most cases. The most significant difference is in the hg repo between revisions 4.0 and 4.8. In that case it seems to come from the fact that pathcopies() uses fctx.isintroducedafter() (in _tracefile), while the old mergecopies() used fctx.linkrev() (in _checkcopies()). That results in a single call to filectx._adjustlinkrev(), which is responsible for the entire difference in time (in my repo). So we pay a performance penalty but we get more correct code (see change in test-mv-cp-st-diff.t). Deleting the "== f.filenode()" in _tracefile() recovers the lost performance in the hg repo. There were are few other optimizations in _checkcopies() that I could not measure any impact from. One was from the "seen" set. Another was from a "continue" when the file was not in the destination manifest (corresponding to "am" in _tracefile). Also note that merge copies are not calculated when updating with a clean working copy, which is probably the most common case. I therefore think the much simpler code is worth the slowdown. Differential Revision: https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D6255

File last commit:

r42408:57203e02 default
r42408:57203e02 default
Show More
test-copies.t
644 lines | 13.4 KiB | text/troff | Tads3Lexer
#testcases filelog compatibility changeset
$ cat >> $HGRCPATH << EOF
> [extensions]
> rebase=
> [alias]
> l = log -G -T '{rev} {desc}\n{files}\n'
> EOF
#if compatibility
$ cat >> $HGRCPATH << EOF
> [experimental]
> copies.read-from = compatibility
> EOF
#endif
#if changeset
$ cat >> $HGRCPATH << EOF
> [experimental]
> copies.read-from = changeset-only
> copies.write-to = changeset-only
> EOF
#endif
$ REPONUM=0
$ newrepo() {
> cd $TESTTMP
> REPONUM=`expr $REPONUM + 1`
> hg init repo-$REPONUM
> cd repo-$REPONUM
> }
Simple rename case
$ newrepo
$ echo x > x
$ hg ci -Aqm 'add x'
$ hg mv x y
$ hg debugp1copies
x -> y
$ hg debugp2copies
$ hg ci -m 'rename x to y'
$ hg l
@ 1 rename x to y
| x y
o 0 add x
x
$ hg debugp1copies -r 1
x -> y
$ hg debugpathcopies 0 1
x -> y
$ hg debugpathcopies 1 0
y -> x
Test filtering copies by path. We do filtering by destination.
$ hg debugpathcopies 0 1 x
$ hg debugpathcopies 1 0 x
y -> x
$ hg debugpathcopies 0 1 y
x -> y
$ hg debugpathcopies 1 0 y
Copy a file onto another file
$ newrepo
$ echo x > x
$ echo y > y
$ hg ci -Aqm 'add x and y'
$ hg cp -f x y
$ hg debugp1copies
x -> y
$ hg debugp2copies
$ hg ci -m 'copy x onto y'
$ hg l
@ 1 copy x onto y
| y
o 0 add x and y
x y
$ hg debugp1copies -r 1
x -> y
Incorrectly doesn't show the rename
$ hg debugpathcopies 0 1
Copy a file onto another file with same content. If metadata is stored in changeset, this does not
produce a new filelog entry. The changeset's "files" entry should still list the file.
$ newrepo
$ echo x > x
$ echo x > x2
$ hg ci -Aqm 'add x and x2 with same content'
$ hg cp -f x x2
$ hg ci -m 'copy x onto x2'
$ hg l
@ 1 copy x onto x2
| x2
o 0 add x and x2 with same content
x x2
$ hg debugp1copies -r 1
x -> x2
Incorrectly doesn't show the rename
$ hg debugpathcopies 0 1
Copy a file, then delete destination, then copy again. This does not create a new filelog entry.
$ newrepo
$ echo x > x
$ hg ci -Aqm 'add x'
$ hg cp x y
$ hg ci -m 'copy x to y'
$ hg rm y
$ hg ci -m 'remove y'
$ hg cp -f x y
$ hg ci -m 'copy x onto y (again)'
$ hg l
@ 3 copy x onto y (again)
| y
o 2 remove y
| y
o 1 copy x to y
| y
o 0 add x
x
$ hg debugp1copies -r 3
x -> y
$ hg debugpathcopies 0 3
x -> y
Rename file in a loop: x->y->z->x
$ newrepo
$ echo x > x
$ hg ci -Aqm 'add x'
$ hg mv x y
$ hg debugp1copies
x -> y
$ hg debugp2copies
$ hg ci -m 'rename x to y'
$ hg mv y z
$ hg ci -m 'rename y to z'
$ hg mv z x
$ hg ci -m 'rename z to x'
$ hg l
@ 3 rename z to x
| x z
o 2 rename y to z
| y z
o 1 rename x to y
| x y
o 0 add x
x
$ hg debugpathcopies 0 3
Copy x to y, then remove y, then add back y. With copy metadata in the changeset, this could easily
end up reporting y as copied from x (if we don't unmark it as a copy when it's removed).
$ newrepo
$ echo x > x
$ hg ci -Aqm 'add x'
$ hg mv x y
$ hg ci -m 'rename x to y'
$ hg rm y
$ hg ci -qm 'remove y'
$ echo x > y
$ hg ci -Aqm 'add back y'
$ hg l
@ 3 add back y
| y
o 2 remove y
| y
o 1 rename x to y
| x y
o 0 add x
x
$ hg debugp1copies -r 3
$ hg debugpathcopies 0 3
Copy x to z, then remove z, then copy x2 (same content as x) to z. With copy metadata in the
changeset, the two copies here will have the same filelog entry, so ctx['z'].introrev() might point
to the first commit that added the file. We should still report the copy as being from x2.
$ newrepo
$ echo x > x
$ echo x > x2
$ hg ci -Aqm 'add x and x2 with same content'
$ hg cp x z
$ hg ci -qm 'copy x to z'
$ hg rm z
$ hg ci -m 'remove z'
$ hg cp x2 z
$ hg ci -m 'copy x2 to z'
$ hg l
@ 3 copy x2 to z
| z
o 2 remove z
| z
o 1 copy x to z
| z
o 0 add x and x2 with same content
x x2
$ hg debugp1copies -r 3
x2 -> z
$ hg debugpathcopies 0 3
x2 -> z
Create x and y, then rename them both to the same name, but on different sides of a fork
$ newrepo
$ echo x > x
$ echo y > y
$ hg ci -Aqm 'add x and y'
$ hg mv x z
$ hg ci -qm 'rename x to z'
$ hg co -q 0
$ hg mv y z
$ hg ci -qm 'rename y to z'
$ hg l
@ 2 rename y to z
| y z
| o 1 rename x to z
|/ x z
o 0 add x and y
x y
$ hg debugpathcopies 1 2
z -> x
y -> z
Fork renames x to y on one side and removes x on the other
$ newrepo
$ echo x > x
$ hg ci -Aqm 'add x'
$ hg mv x y
$ hg ci -m 'rename x to y'
$ hg co -q 0
$ hg rm x
$ hg ci -m 'remove x'
created new head
$ hg l
@ 2 remove x
| x
| o 1 rename x to y
|/ x y
o 0 add x
x
$ hg debugpathcopies 1 2
Copies via null revision (there shouldn't be any)
$ newrepo
$ echo x > x
$ hg ci -Aqm 'add x'
$ hg cp x y
$ hg ci -m 'copy x to y'
$ hg co -q null
$ echo x > x
$ hg ci -Aqm 'add x (again)'
$ hg l
@ 2 add x (again)
x
o 1 copy x to y
| y
o 0 add x
x
$ hg debugpathcopies 1 2
$ hg debugpathcopies 2 1
Merge rename from other branch
$ newrepo
$ echo x > x
$ hg ci -Aqm 'add x'
$ hg mv x y
$ hg ci -m 'rename x to y'
$ hg co -q 0
$ echo z > z
$ hg ci -Aqm 'add z'
$ hg merge -q 1
$ hg debugp1copies
$ hg debugp2copies
$ hg ci -m 'merge rename from p2'
$ hg l
@ 3 merge rename from p2
|\ x
| o 2 add z
| | z
o | 1 rename x to y
|/ x y
o 0 add x
x
Perhaps we should indicate the rename here, but `hg status` is documented to be weird during
merges, so...
$ hg debugp1copies -r 3
$ hg debugp2copies -r 3
$ hg debugpathcopies 0 3
x -> y
$ hg debugpathcopies 1 2
y -> x
$ hg debugpathcopies 1 3
$ hg debugpathcopies 2 3
x -> y
Copy file from either side in a merge
$ newrepo
$ echo x > x
$ hg ci -Aqm 'add x'
$ hg co -q null
$ echo y > y
$ hg ci -Aqm 'add y'
$ hg merge -q 0
$ hg cp y z
$ hg debugp1copies
y -> z
$ hg debugp2copies
$ hg ci -m 'copy file from p1 in merge'
$ hg co -q 1
$ hg merge -q 0
$ hg cp x z
$ hg debugp1copies
$ hg debugp2copies
x -> z
$ hg ci -qm 'copy file from p2 in merge'
$ hg l
@ 3 copy file from p2 in merge
|\ z
+---o 2 copy file from p1 in merge
| |/ z
| o 1 add y
| y
o 0 add x
x
$ hg debugp1copies -r 2
y -> z
$ hg debugp2copies -r 2
$ hg debugpathcopies 1 2
y -> z
$ hg debugpathcopies 0 2
$ hg debugp1copies -r 3
$ hg debugp2copies -r 3
x -> z
$ hg debugpathcopies 1 3
$ hg debugpathcopies 0 3
x -> z
Copy file that exists on both sides of the merge, same content on both sides
$ newrepo
$ echo x > x
$ hg ci -Aqm 'add x on branch 1'
$ hg co -q null
$ echo x > x
$ hg ci -Aqm 'add x on branch 2'
$ hg merge -q 0
$ hg cp x z
$ hg debugp1copies
x -> z
$ hg debugp2copies
$ hg ci -qm 'merge'
$ hg l
@ 2 merge
|\ z
| o 1 add x on branch 2
| x
o 0 add x on branch 1
x
$ hg debugp1copies -r 2
x -> z
$ hg debugp2copies -r 2
It's a little weird that it shows up on both sides
$ hg debugpathcopies 1 2
x -> z
$ hg debugpathcopies 0 2
x -> z (filelog !)
Copy file that exists on both sides of the merge, different content
$ newrepo
$ echo branch1 > x
$ hg ci -Aqm 'add x on branch 1'
$ hg co -q null
$ echo branch2 > x
$ hg ci -Aqm 'add x on branch 2'
$ hg merge -q 0
warning: conflicts while merging x! (edit, then use 'hg resolve --mark')
[1]
$ echo resolved > x
$ hg resolve -m x
(no more unresolved files)
$ hg cp x z
$ hg debugp1copies
x -> z
$ hg debugp2copies
$ hg ci -qm 'merge'
$ hg l
@ 2 merge
|\ x z
| o 1 add x on branch 2
| x
o 0 add x on branch 1
x
$ hg debugp1copies -r 2
x -> z (changeset !)
$ hg debugp2copies -r 2
x -> z (no-changeset !)
$ hg debugpathcopies 1 2
x -> z (changeset !)
$ hg debugpathcopies 0 2
x -> z (no-changeset !)
Copy x->y on one side of merge and copy x->z on the other side. Pathcopies from one parent
of the merge to the merge should include the copy from the other side.
$ newrepo
$ echo x > x
$ hg ci -Aqm 'add x'
$ hg cp x y
$ hg ci -qm 'copy x to y'
$ hg co -q 0
$ hg cp x z
$ hg ci -qm 'copy x to z'
$ hg merge -q 1
$ hg ci -m 'merge copy x->y and copy x->z'
$ hg l
@ 3 merge copy x->y and copy x->z
|\
| o 2 copy x to z
| | z
o | 1 copy x to y
|/ y
o 0 add x
x
$ hg debugp1copies -r 3
$ hg debugp2copies -r 3
$ hg debugpathcopies 2 3
x -> y
$ hg debugpathcopies 1 3
x -> z
Copy x to y on one side of merge, create y and rename to z on the other side. Pathcopies from the
first side should not include the y->z rename since y didn't exist in the merge base.
$ newrepo
$ echo x > x
$ hg ci -Aqm 'add x'
$ hg cp x y
$ hg ci -qm 'copy x to y'
$ hg co -q 0
$ echo y > y
$ hg ci -Aqm 'add y'
$ hg mv y z
$ hg ci -m 'rename y to z'
$ hg merge -q 1
$ hg ci -m 'merge'
$ hg l
@ 4 merge
|\
| o 3 rename y to z
| | y z
| o 2 add y
| | y
o | 1 copy x to y
|/ y
o 0 add x
x
$ hg debugp1copies -r 3
y -> z
$ hg debugp2copies -r 3
$ hg debugpathcopies 2 3
y -> z
$ hg debugpathcopies 1 3
Create x and y, then rename x to z on one side of merge, and rename y to z and modify z on the
other side.
$ newrepo
$ echo x > x
$ echo y > y
$ hg ci -Aqm 'add x and y'
$ hg mv x z
$ hg ci -qm 'rename x to z'
$ hg co -q 0
$ hg mv y z
$ hg ci -qm 'rename y to z'
$ echo z >> z
$ hg ci -m 'modify z'
$ hg merge -q 1
warning: conflicts while merging z! (edit, then use 'hg resolve --mark')
[1]
$ echo z > z
$ hg resolve -qm z
$ hg ci -m 'merge 1 into 3'
Try merging the other direction too
$ hg co -q 1
$ hg merge -q 3
warning: conflicts while merging z! (edit, then use 'hg resolve --mark')
[1]
$ echo z > z
$ hg resolve -qm z
$ hg ci -m 'merge 3 into 1'
created new head
$ hg l
@ 5 merge 3 into 1
|\ y z
+---o 4 merge 1 into 3
| |/ x z
| o 3 modify z
| | z
| o 2 rename y to z
| | y z
o | 1 rename x to z
|/ x z
o 0 add x and y
x y
$ hg debugpathcopies 1 4
$ hg debugpathcopies 2 4
$ hg debugpathcopies 0 4
x -> z (filelog !)
y -> z (compatibility !)
$ hg debugpathcopies 1 5
$ hg debugpathcopies 2 5
$ hg debugpathcopies 0 5
x -> z
Test for a case in fullcopytracing algorithm where both the merging csets are
"dirty"; where a dirty cset means that cset is descendant of merge base. This
test reflect that for this particular case this algorithm correctly find the copies:
$ cat >> $HGRCPATH << EOF
> [experimental]
> evolution.createmarkers=True
> evolution.allowunstable=True
> EOF
$ newrepo
$ echo a > a
$ hg add a
$ hg ci -m "added a"
$ echo b > b
$ hg add b
$ hg ci -m "added b"
$ hg mv b b1
$ hg ci -m "rename b to b1"
$ hg up ".^"
1 files updated, 0 files merged, 1 files removed, 0 files unresolved
$ echo d > d
$ hg add d
$ hg ci -m "added d"
created new head
$ echo baba >> b
$ hg ci --amend -m "added d, modified b"
$ hg l --hidden
@ 4 added d, modified b
| b d
| x 3 added d
|/ d
| o 2 rename b to b1
|/ b b1
o 1 added b
| b
o 0 added a
a
Grafting revision 4 on top of revision 2, showing that it respect the rename:
$ hg up 2 -q
$ hg graft -r 4 --base 3 --hidden
grafting 4:af28412ec03c "added d, modified b" (tip)
merging b1 and b to b1
$ hg l -l1 -p
@ 5 added d, modified b
| b1
~ diff -r 5a4825cc2926 -r 94a2f1a0e8e2 b1 (no-changeset !)
~ diff -r f5474f5023a8 -r ef7c02d69f3d b1 (changeset !)
--- a/b1 Thu Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 +0000
+++ b/b1 Thu Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 +0000
@@ -1,1 +1,2 @@
b
+baba
Test to make sure that fullcopytracing algorithm don't fail when both the merging csets are dirty
(a dirty cset is one who is not the descendant of merge base)
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
$ newrepo
$ echo a > a
$ hg add a
$ hg ci -m "added a"
$ echo b > b
$ hg add b
$ hg ci -m "added b"
$ echo foobar > willconflict
$ hg add willconflict
$ hg ci -m "added willconflict"
$ echo c > c
$ hg add c
$ hg ci -m "added c"
$ hg l
@ 3 added c
| c
o 2 added willconflict
| willconflict
o 1 added b
| b
o 0 added a
a
$ hg up ".^^"
0 files updated, 0 files merged, 2 files removed, 0 files unresolved
$ echo d > d
$ hg add d
$ hg ci -m "added d"
created new head
$ echo barfoo > willconflict
$ hg add willconflict
$ hg ci --amend -m "added willconflict and d"
$ hg l
@ 5 added willconflict and d
| d willconflict
| o 3 added c
| | c
| o 2 added willconflict
|/ willconflict
o 1 added b
| b
o 0 added a
a
$ hg rebase -r . -d 2 -t :other
rebasing 5:5018b1509e94 "added willconflict and d" (tip)
$ hg up 3 -q
$ hg l --hidden
o 6 added willconflict and d
| d willconflict
| x 5 added willconflict and d
| | d willconflict
| | x 4 added d
| |/ d
+---@ 3 added c
| | c
o | 2 added willconflict
|/ willconflict
o 1 added b
| b
o 0 added a
a
Now if we trigger a merge between cset revision 3 and 6 using base revision 4, in this case
both the merging csets will be dirty as no one is descendent of base revision:
$ hg graft -r 6 --base 4 --hidden -t :other
grafting 6:99802e4f1e46 "added willconflict and d" (tip)