You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
When rearranging the todo list so that the fixups/squashes are reordered
just after the commits they intend to fix up, we use two arrays to
maintain that list: `next` and `tail`.
The idea is that `next[i]`, if set to a non-negative value, contains the
index of the item that should be rearranged just after the `i`th item.
To avoid having to walk the entire `next` chain when appending another
fixup/squash, we also store the end of the `next` chain in `tail[i]`.
The logic we currently use to update these array items is based on the
assumption that given a fixup/squash item at index `i`, we just found
the index `i2` indicating the first item in that fixup chain.
However, as reported by Paul Ganssle, that need not be true: the special
form `fixup! <commit-hash>` is allowed to point to _another_ fixup
commit in the middle of the fixup chain.
Example:
* 0192a To fixup
* 02f12 fixup! To fixup
* 03763 fixup! To fixup
* 04ecb fixup! 02f12
Note how the fourth commit targets the second commit, which is already a
fixup that targets the first commit.
Previously, we would update `next` and `tail` under our assumption that
every `fixup!` commit would find the start of the `fixup!`/`squash!`
chain. This would lead to a segmentation fault because we would actually
end up with a `next[i]` pointing to a `fixup!` but the corresponding
`tail[i]` pointing nowhere, which would the lead to a segmentation
fault.
Let's fix this by _inserting_, rather than _appending_, the item. In
other words, if we make a given line successor of another line, we do
not simply forget any previously set successor of the latter, but make
it a successor of the former.
In the above example, at the point when we insert 04ecb just after
02f12, 03763 would already be recorded as a successor of 04ecb, and we
now "squeeze in" 04ecb.
To complete the idea, we now no longer assume that `next[i]` pointing to
a line means that `last[i]` points to a line, too. Instead, we extend
the concept of `last` to cover also partial `fixup!`/`squash!` chains,
i.e. chains starting in the middle of a larger such chain.
In the above example, after processing all lines, `last[0]`
(corresponding to 0192a) would point to 03763, which indeed is the end
of the overall `fixup!` chain, and `last[1]` (corresponding to 02f12)
would point to 04ecb (which is the last `fixup!` targeting 02f12, but it
has 03763 as successor, i.e. it is not the end of overall `fixup!`
chain).
Reported-by: Paul Ganssle <[email protected]>
Helped-by: Jeff King <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <[email protected]>
0 commit comments