trace2: prevent segfault on config collection where no value specified

[ad-murray]

cc: Jeff King [email protected]
cc: Johannes Schindelin [email protected]
cc: "D. Ben Knoble" [email protected]

[gitgitgadget]

Welcome to GitGitGadget

Hi @ad-murray, and welcome to GitGitGadget, the GitHub App to send patch series to the Git mailing list from GitHub Pull Requests.

Please make sure that either:

• Your Pull Request has a good description, if it consists of multiple commits, as it will be used as cover letter.
• Your Pull Request description is empty, if it consists of a single commit, as the commit message should be descriptive enough by itself.

You can CC potential reviewers by adding a footer to the PR description with the following syntax:

CC: Revi Ewer <[email protected]>, Ill Takalook <[email protected]>

NOTE: DO NOT copy/paste your CC list from a previous GGG PR's description,
because it will result in a malformed CC list on the mailing list. See
example.

Also, it is a good idea to review the commit messages one last time, as the Git project expects them in a quite specific form:

• the lines should not exceed 76 columns,
• the first line should be like a header and typically start with a prefix like "tests:" or "revisions:" to state which subsystem the change is about, and
• the commit messages' body should be describing the "why?" of the change.
• Finally, the commit messages should end in a Signed-off-by: line matching the commits' author.

It is in general a good idea to await the automated test ("Checks") in this Pull Request before contributing the patches, e.g. to avoid trivial issues such as unportable code.

Contributing the patches

Before you can contribute the patches, your GitHub username needs to be added to the list of permitted users. Any already-permitted user can do that, by adding a comment to your PR of the form /allow. A good way to find other contributors is to locate recent pull requests where someone has been /allowed:

• Search: is:pr is:open "/allow"

Both the person who commented /allow and the PR author are able to /allow you.

An alternative is the channel #git-devel on the Libera Chat IRC network:

<newcontributor> I've just created my first PR, could someone please /allow me? https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git/pull/12345
<veteran> newcontributor: it is done
<newcontributor> thanks!

Once on the list of permitted usernames, you can contribute the patches to the Git mailing list by adding a PR comment /submit.

If you want to see what email(s) would be sent for a /submit request, add a PR comment /preview to have the email(s) sent to you. You must have a public GitHub email address for this. Note that any reviewers CC'd via the list in the PR description will not actually be sent emails.

After you submit, GitGitGadget will respond with another comment that contains the link to the cover letter mail in the Git mailing list archive. Please make sure to monitor the discussion in that thread and to address comments and suggestions (while the comments and suggestions will be mirrored into the PR by GitGitGadget, you will still want to reply via mail).

If you do not want to subscribe to the Git mailing list just to be able to respond to a mail, you can download the mbox from the Git mailing list archive (click the (raw) link), then import it into your mail program. If you use GMail, you can do this via:

curl -g --user "<EMailAddress>:<Password>" \
    --url "imaps://imap.gmail.com/INBOX" -T /path/to/raw.txt

To iterate on your change, i.e. send a revised patch or patch series, you will first want to (force-)push to the same branch. You probably also want to modify your Pull Request description (or title). It is a good idea to summarize the revision by adding something like this to the cover letter (read: by editing the first comment on the PR, i.e. the PR description):

Changes since v1:
- Fixed a typo in the commit message (found by ...)
- Added a code comment to ... as suggested by ...
...

To send a new iteration, just add another PR comment with the contents: /submit.

Need help?

New contributors who want advice are encouraged to join [email protected], where volunteers who regularly contribute to Git are willing to answer newbie questions, give advice, or otherwise provide mentoring to interested contributors. You must join in order to post or view messages, but anyone can join.

You may also be able to find help in real time in the developer IRC channel, #git-devel on Libera Chat. Remember that IRC does not support offline messaging, so if you send someone a private message and log out, they cannot respond to you. The scrollback of #git-devel is archived, though.

[gitgitgadget]

There are issues in commit 2d4ddcf:
add null check for config value
Commit checks stopped - the message is too short
Commit not signed off

[Haizzz]

/allow ad-murray

[gitgitgadget]

User ad-murray is now allowed to use GitGitGadget.

WARNING: ad-murray has no public email address set on GitHub;
GitGitGadget needs an email address to Cc: you on your contribution, so that you receive any feedback on the Git mailing list. Go to https://github.com/settings/profile to make your preferred email public to let GitGitGadget know which email address to use.

[gitgitgadget]

There are issues in commit 976bdf6:
Prevent segfault on trace2 config collection where no value specified
Commit checks stopped - the message is too short
Commit not signed off

[gitgitgadget]

There are issues in commit b696097:
trace2: prevent segfault on config collection where no value specified
Commit checks stopped - the message is too short
Commit not signed off

[dscho]

Commit checks stopped - the message is too short

Please follow the guidance in https://github.blog/2022-06-30-write-better-commits-build-better-projects/ to improve it, in particular with a strong focus on this part:

	What you’re doing	Why you’re doing it
High-level (strategic)	Intent (what does this accomplish?)	Context (why does the code do what it does now?)
Low-level (tactical)	Implementation (what did you do to accomplish your goal?)	Justification (why is this change being made?)

In this instance, the commit message could explain, for example, why the !strlen(value) condition is needed, i.e. how a non-NULL but still empty value could lead to a segmentation fault and where in the code that would happen.

Commit not signed off

The Git project requires you to "sign off" your work, please amend the commit accordingly and force-push.

[gitgitgadget]

There are issues in commit 9b505b7:
trace2: prevent segfault on config collection where no value specified
Lines in the body of the commit messages should be wrapped between 60 and 76 characters.
Indented lines, and lines without whitespace, are exempt

[gitgitgadget]

There are issues in commit 48ffb81:
trace2: prevent segfault on config collection where no value specified
Lines in the body of the commit messages should be wrapped between 60 and 76 characters.
Indented lines, and lines without whitespace, are exempt

[ad-murray]

Commit checks stopped - the message is too short

Please follow the guidance in https://github.blog/2022-06-30-write-better-commits-build-better-projects/ to improve it, in particular with a strong focus on this part:

  What you’re doing Why you’re doing it
High-level (strategic) Intent (what does this accomplish?) Context (why does the code do what it does now?)
Low-level (tactical) Implementation (what did you do to accomplish your goal?) Justification (why is this change being made?)
In this instance, the commit message could explain, for example, why the !strlen(value) condition is needed, i.e. how a non-NULL but still empty value could lead to a segmentation fault and where in the code that would happen.

Commit not signed off

The Git project requires you to "sign off" your work, please amend the commit accordingly and force-push.

Commit message updated, is there a way to re-run the failing checks?

[dscho]

is there a way to re-run the failing checks?

Well, those checks fail because the patch introduces a regression. In particular t1300.131 documents that git -c foo.flag config --bool foo.flag should return true, not an error.

Speaking of test cases: You described one in the commit message. How about moving it from the commit message into an actual test script, to verify that the described regression is fixed (and to prevent future regressions going unnoticed)? t0210-trace2-normal.sh would make for a fine home for that test case.

As to the fix for the segmentation fault: I think this diff, or a variation thereof, should be the correct fix:

diff --git a/trace2.c b/trace2.c
index f894532d0533..6cae41ca61c4 100644
--- a/trace2.c
+++ b/trace2.c
@@ -259,7 +259,7 @@ static const char *redact_arg(const char *arg)
 	const char *p, *colon;
 	size_t at;
 
-	if (!trace2_redact ||
+	if (!trace2_redact || !arg ||
 	    (!skip_prefix(arg, "https://", &p) &&
 	     !skip_prefix(arg, "http://", &p)))
 		return arg;

[ad-murray]

right you are, will do

[ad-murray]

/submit

[ad-murray]

/submit

[ad-murray]

/submit

[gitgitgadget]

Error: Ignoring PR with empty title and/or body

[dscho]

Error: Ignoring PR with empty title and/or body

@ad-murray This means that GitGitGadget requires a cover letter (which is composed of the PR title, and the PR description, i.e. the initial comment).

However, in this instance I am convinced that you do not want to contribute three patches; Instead, you will want to "squash" them into a single commit. Once you do that, you do not need to populate the initial comment with content for a cover letter, as none will be sent for single-patch contributions, as per the Git maintainer's request.

[gitgitgadget]

There are issues in commit 627d9b5:
When TRACE2 analytics is enabled, a git config option that has no value
The first line must be separated from the rest by an empty line

[gitgitgadget]

There are issues in commit 627d9b5:
When TRACE2 analytics is enabled, a git config option that has no value
The first line must be separated from the rest by an empty line

[gitgitgadget]

There are issues in commit e48f724:
When TRACE2 analytics is enabled, a git config option that has no value
The first line must be separated from the rest by an empty line

[gitgitgadget]

There are issues in commit a4d1f1d:
When TRACE2 analytics is enabled, a git config option that has no value
The first line must be separated from the rest by an empty line

[gitgitgadget]

There are issues in commit a334b65:
When TRACE2 analytics is enabled, a git config option that has no value
The first line must be separated from the rest by an empty line

[ad-murray]

/submit

[gitgitgadget]

Submitted as [email protected]

To fetch this version into FETCH_HEAD:

git fetch https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git/ pr-1814/ad-murray/fix-trace2-segfault-v2

To fetch this version to local tag pr-1814/ad-murray/fix-trace2-segfault-v2:

git fetch --no-tags https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git/ tag pr-1814/ad-murray/fix-trace2-segfault-v2

[gitgitgadget]

On the Git mailing list, Junio C Hamano wrote (reply to this):

"Adam Murray via GitGitGadget" <[email protected]> writes:

> From: Adam Murray <[email protected]>
>
> When TRACE2 analytics is enabled, a git config option that has no value
> causes a segfault.

We often call this "valueless true syntax".  It may techincally
correct to say "has no value", but it is more friendly to readers if
you said "a configuration variable that is set to 'true' with
the valueless true syntax".

> diff --git a/trace2.c b/trace2.c
> index f894532d053..49e7d1db88f 100644
> --- a/trace2.c
> +++ b/trace2.c
> @@ -762,7 +762,7 @@ void trace2_def_param_fl(const char *file, int line, const char *param,
>  	if (!trace2_enabled)
>  		return;
>  
> -	redacted = redact_arg(value);
> +	redacted = value ? redact_arg(value): NULL;
>  
>  	for_each_wanted_builtin (j, tgt_j)
>  		if (tgt_j->pfn_param_fl)
> diff --git a/trace2/tr2_tgt_event.c b/trace2/tr2_tgt_event.c
> index 45b0850a5ec..8e09485c83c 100644
> --- a/trace2/tr2_tgt_event.c
> +++ b/trace2/tr2_tgt_event.c
> @@ -491,7 +491,8 @@ static void fn_param_fl(const char *file, int line, const char *param,
>  	event_fmt_prepare(event_name, file, line, NULL, &jw);
>  	jw_object_string(&jw, "scope", scope_name);
>  	jw_object_string(&jw, "param", param);
> -	jw_object_string(&jw, "value", value);
> +	if (value)
> +		jw_object_string(&jw, "value", value);
>  	jw_end(&jw);

OK, so for "valueless true", we do not get the "value" element in
the json output, which makes sense.  Don't we have documentation
that explains what each element in the output means and when they
are given?  Shouldn't we update it?

> -	strbuf_addf(&buf_payload, "def_param scope:%s %s=%s", scope_name, param,
> -		    value);
> +	strbuf_addf(&buf_payload, "def_param scope:%s %s", scope_name, param);
> +	if (value)
> +		strbuf_addf(&buf_payload, "=%s", value);

OK.

The input did not spell the "=value" part and said "[section] key"
to mean that section.key is true, so we report that without "=value"
part.  This also makes sense.

> diff --git a/trace2/tr2_tgt_perf.c b/trace2/tr2_tgt_perf.c
> index a6f9a8a193e..19ae7433ef8 100644
> --- a/trace2/tr2_tgt_perf.c
> +++ b/trace2/tr2_tgt_perf.c
> @@ -446,8 +446,9 @@ static void fn_param_fl(const char *file, int line, const char *param,
>  	struct strbuf scope_payload = STRBUF_INIT;
>  	enum config_scope scope = kvi->scope;
>  	const char *scope_name = config_scope_name(scope);
> -
> -	strbuf_addf(&buf_payload, "%s:%s", param, value);
> +	strbuf_addstr(&buf_payload, param);
> +	if (value)
> +		strbuf_addf(&buf_payload, ":%s", value);

I am not versed well enough in tgt-parf output format to tell if
this makes sense.  We'd need somebody else to review this part.

Thanks.

[gitgitgadget]

On the Git mailing list, Johannes Schindelin wrote (reply to this):

Hi Adam,

On Fri, 10 Jan 2025, Adam Murray via GitGitGadget wrote:

> From: Adam Murray <[email protected]>
>
> When TRACE2 analytics is enabled, a git config option that has no value
> causes a segfault.
>
> Steps to Reproduce
> GIT_TRACE2=true GIT_TRACE2_CONFIG_PARAMS=status.*
> git -c status.relativePaths version
> Expected Result
> git version 2.46.0
> Actual Result
> zsh: segmentation fault GIT_TRACE2=true
>
> This adds checks to prevent the segfault and instead return
> an empty value.
>
> Signed-off-by: Adam Murray <[email protected]>

This patch looks good to me!

Thank you for the fix,
Johannes

> ---
>     trace2: prevent segfault on config collection where no value specified
>
>     cc: Jeff King [email protected]
>
> Published-As: https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git/releases/tag/pr-1814%2Fad-murray%2Ffix-trace2-segfault-v2
> Fetch-It-Via: git fetch https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git pr-1814/ad-murray/fix-trace2-segfault-v2
> Pull-Request: https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git/pull/1814
>
> Range-diff vs v1:
>
>  1:  24ba9db7aa1 ! 1:  fd7bed52dda trace2: prevent segfault on config collection where no value specified
>      @@ Commit message
>           Actual Result
>           zsh: segmentation fault GIT_TRACE2=true
>
>      -    This adds a null check to prevent the segfault and instead return
>      -    the "empty config value" error.
>      +    This adds checks to prevent the segfault and instead return
>      +    an empty value.
>
>           Signed-off-by: Adam Murray <[email protected]>
>
>      @@ t/t0210-trace2-normal.sh: test_expect_success 'bug messages followed by BUG() ar
>
>        ## trace2.c ##
>       @@ trace2.c: void trace2_def_param_fl(const char *file, int line, const char *param,
>      - 	int j;
>      - 	const char *redacted;
>      -
>      --	if (!trace2_enabled)
>      -+	if (!trace2_enabled || !value)
>      + 	if (!trace2_enabled)
>        		return;
>
>      - 	redacted = redact_arg(value);
>      +-	redacted = redact_arg(value);
>      ++	redacted = value ? redact_arg(value): NULL;
>      +
>      + 	for_each_wanted_builtin (j, tgt_j)
>      + 		if (tgt_j->pfn_param_fl)
>      +
>      + ## trace2/tr2_tgt_event.c ##
>      +@@ trace2/tr2_tgt_event.c: static void fn_param_fl(const char *file, int line, const char *param,
>      + 	event_fmt_prepare(event_name, file, line, NULL, &jw);
>      + 	jw_object_string(&jw, "scope", scope_name);
>      + 	jw_object_string(&jw, "param", param);
>      +-	jw_object_string(&jw, "value", value);
>      ++	if (value)
>      ++		jw_object_string(&jw, "value", value);
>      + 	jw_end(&jw);
>      +
>      + 	tr2_dst_write_line(&tr2dst_event, &jw.json);
>      +
>      + ## trace2/tr2_tgt_normal.c ##
>      +@@ trace2/tr2_tgt_normal.c: static void fn_param_fl(const char *file, int line, const char *param,
>      + 	enum config_scope scope = kvi->scope;
>      + 	const char *scope_name = config_scope_name(scope);
>      +
>      +-	strbuf_addf(&buf_payload, "def_param scope:%s %s=%s", scope_name, param,
>      +-		    value);
>      ++	strbuf_addf(&buf_payload, "def_param scope:%s %s", scope_name, param);
>      ++	if (value)
>      ++		strbuf_addf(&buf_payload, "=%s", value);
>      + 	normal_io_write_fl(file, line, &buf_payload);
>      + 	strbuf_release(&buf_payload);
>      + }
>      +
>      + ## trace2/tr2_tgt_perf.c ##
>      +@@ trace2/tr2_tgt_perf.c: static void fn_param_fl(const char *file, int line, const char *param,
>      + 	struct strbuf scope_payload = STRBUF_INIT;
>      + 	enum config_scope scope = kvi->scope;
>      + 	const char *scope_name = config_scope_name(scope);
>      +-
>      +-	strbuf_addf(&buf_payload, "%s:%s", param, value);
>      ++	strbuf_addstr(&buf_payload, param);
>      ++	if (value)
>      ++		strbuf_addf(&buf_payload, ":%s", value);
>      + 	strbuf_addf(&scope_payload, "%s:%s", "scope", scope_name);
>      +
>      + 	perf_io_write_fl(file, line, event_name, NULL, NULL, NULL,
>
>
>  t/t0210-trace2-normal.sh | 8 ++++++++
>  trace2.c                 | 2 +-
>  trace2/tr2_tgt_event.c   | 3 ++-
>  trace2/tr2_tgt_normal.c  | 5 +++--
>  trace2/tr2_tgt_perf.c    | 5 +++--
>  5 files changed, 17 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/t/t0210-trace2-normal.sh b/t/t0210-trace2-normal.sh
> index b9adc94aab4..4047ab562a4 100755
> --- a/t/t0210-trace2-normal.sh
> +++ b/t/t0210-trace2-normal.sh
> @@ -244,6 +244,14 @@ test_expect_success 'bug messages followed by BUG() are written to trace2' '
>  	test_cmp expect actual
>  '
>
> +test_expect_success 'empty configuration values are handled' '
> +  test_when_finished "rm trace2.normal actual expect" &&
> +  echo >expect &&
> +  GIT_TRACE2="$(pwd)/trace2.normal"  GIT_TRACE2_CONFIG_PARAMS=foo.empty \
> +	  git -c foo.empty config foo.empty >actual &&
> +	test_cmp expect actual
> +'
> +
>  sane_unset GIT_TRACE2_BRIEF
>
>  # Now test without environment variables and get all Trace2 settings
> diff --git a/trace2.c b/trace2.c
> index f894532d053..49e7d1db88f 100644
> --- a/trace2.c
> +++ b/trace2.c
> @@ -762,7 +762,7 @@ void trace2_def_param_fl(const char *file, int line, const char *param,
>  	if (!trace2_enabled)
>  		return;
>
> -	redacted = redact_arg(value);
> +	redacted = value ? redact_arg(value): NULL;
>
>  	for_each_wanted_builtin (j, tgt_j)
>  		if (tgt_j->pfn_param_fl)
> diff --git a/trace2/tr2_tgt_event.c b/trace2/tr2_tgt_event.c
> index 45b0850a5ec..8e09485c83c 100644
> --- a/trace2/tr2_tgt_event.c
> +++ b/trace2/tr2_tgt_event.c
> @@ -491,7 +491,8 @@ static void fn_param_fl(const char *file, int line, const char *param,
>  	event_fmt_prepare(event_name, file, line, NULL, &jw);
>  	jw_object_string(&jw, "scope", scope_name);
>  	jw_object_string(&jw, "param", param);
> -	jw_object_string(&jw, "value", value);
> +	if (value)
> +		jw_object_string(&jw, "value", value);
>  	jw_end(&jw);
>
>  	tr2_dst_write_line(&tr2dst_event, &jw.json);
> diff --git a/trace2/tr2_tgt_normal.c b/trace2/tr2_tgt_normal.c
> index baef48aa698..924736ab360 100644
> --- a/trace2/tr2_tgt_normal.c
> +++ b/trace2/tr2_tgt_normal.c
> @@ -307,8 +307,9 @@ static void fn_param_fl(const char *file, int line, const char *param,
>  	enum config_scope scope = kvi->scope;
>  	const char *scope_name = config_scope_name(scope);
>
> -	strbuf_addf(&buf_payload, "def_param scope:%s %s=%s", scope_name, param,
> -		    value);
> +	strbuf_addf(&buf_payload, "def_param scope:%s %s", scope_name, param);
> +	if (value)
> +		strbuf_addf(&buf_payload, "=%s", value);
>  	normal_io_write_fl(file, line, &buf_payload);
>  	strbuf_release(&buf_payload);
>  }
> diff --git a/trace2/tr2_tgt_perf.c b/trace2/tr2_tgt_perf.c
> index a6f9a8a193e..19ae7433ef8 100644
> --- a/trace2/tr2_tgt_perf.c
> +++ b/trace2/tr2_tgt_perf.c
> @@ -446,8 +446,9 @@ static void fn_param_fl(const char *file, int line, const char *param,
>  	struct strbuf scope_payload = STRBUF_INIT;
>  	enum config_scope scope = kvi->scope;
>  	const char *scope_name = config_scope_name(scope);
> -
> -	strbuf_addf(&buf_payload, "%s:%s", param, value);
> +	strbuf_addstr(&buf_payload, param);
> +	if (value)
> +		strbuf_addf(&buf_payload, ":%s", value);
>  	strbuf_addf(&scope_payload, "%s:%s", "scope", scope_name);
>
>  	perf_io_write_fl(file, line, event_name, NULL, NULL, NULL,
>
> base-commit: 8f8d6eee531b3fa1a8ef14f169b0cb5035f7a772
> --
> gitgitgadget
>
>

[gitgitgadget]

User Johannes Schindelin <[email protected]> has been added to the cc: list.

[gitgitgadget]

On the Git mailing list, Junio C Hamano wrote (reply to this):

Johannes Schindelin <[email protected]> writes:

>
> This patch looks good to me!

Thanks.  As I punted on reviewing the tgt_perf part, it is very good
to see somebody else step in to look it over.

Will queue.

>> diff --git a/trace2/tr2_tgt_perf.c b/trace2/tr2_tgt_perf.c
>> index a6f9a8a193e..19ae7433ef8 100644
>> --- a/trace2/tr2_tgt_perf.c
>> +++ b/trace2/tr2_tgt_perf.c
>> @@ -446,8 +446,9 @@ static void fn_param_fl(const char *file, int line, const char *param,
>>  	struct strbuf scope_payload = STRBUF_INIT;
>>  	enum config_scope scope = kvi->scope;
>>  	const char *scope_name = config_scope_name(scope);
>> -
>> -	strbuf_addf(&buf_payload, "%s:%s", param, value);
>> +	strbuf_addstr(&buf_payload, param);
>> +	if (value)
>> +		strbuf_addf(&buf_payload, ":%s", value);
>>  	strbuf_addf(&scope_payload, "%s:%s", "scope", scope_name);
>>
>>  	perf_io_write_fl(file, line, event_name, NULL, NULL, NULL,
>>
>> base-commit: 8f8d6eee531b3fa1a8ef14f169b0cb5035f7a772
>> --
>> gitgitgadget
>>
>>

[gitgitgadget]

On the Git mailing list, Junio C Hamano wrote (reply to this):

Junio C Hamano <[email protected]> writes:

> Johannes Schindelin <[email protected]> writes:
>
>>
>> This patch looks good to me!
>
> Thanks.  As I punted on reviewing the tgt_perf part, it is very good
> to see somebody else step in to look it over.
>
> Will queue.

The test part used broken indentation and also the use of
test_when_finished was careless, so I'll touch it up before queuing.

No need to resend.

Thanks.

[gitgitgadget]

This patch series was integrated into seen via git@29e775a.

[gitgitgadget]

On the Git mailing list, "D. Ben Knoble" wrote (reply to this):

On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 1:18 PM Junio C Hamano <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Junio C Hamano <[email protected]> writes:
>
> > Johannes Schindelin <[email protected]> writes:
> >
> >>
> >> This patch looks good to me!
> >
> > Thanks.  As I punted on reviewing the tgt_perf part, it is very good
> > to see somebody else step in to look it over.
> >
> > Will queue.
>
> The test part used broken indentation and also the use of
> test_when_finished was careless, so I'll touch it up before queuing.
>
> No need to resend.
>
> Thanks.
>

I was curious what changed, so I found 792a3850fa (trace2: prevent
segfault on config collection with valueless true, 2025-01-10) and I
noticed this:

-       redacted = redact_arg(value);
+       redacted = value ? redact_arg(value): NULL;

I think I expected (based on Documentation/CodingGuidelines) a space
before the ternary conditional's colon. Then again, "git grep '?.*[^
]:' *.[ch]" finds a few other cases with the unspaced style.

-- 
D. Ben Knoble

[gitgitgadget]

User "D. Ben Knoble" <[email protected]> has been added to the cc: list.

[gitgitgadget]

On the Git mailing list, Junio C Hamano wrote (reply to this):

"D. Ben Knoble" <[email protected]> writes:

> I was curious what changed, so I found 792a3850fa (trace2: prevent
> segfault on config collection with valueless true, 2025-01-10) and I
> noticed this:
>
> -       redacted = redact_arg(value);
> +       redacted = value ? redact_arg(value): NULL;

Oh, I do not think I tweaked any of the code, other than fixing the
new test that was not properly formatted.  Mostly I touched up the
log message.

Will touch it up.  Thanks for a careful reading.

[gitgitgadget]

On the Git mailing list, "D. Ben Knoble" wrote (reply to this):

On Thu, Jan 23, 2025 at 1:02 PM Junio C Hamano <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> "D. Ben Knoble" <[email protected]> writes:
>
> > I was curious what changed, so I found 792a3850fa (trace2: prevent
> > segfault on config collection with valueless true, 2025-01-10) and I
> > noticed this:
> >
> > -       redacted = redact_arg(value);
> > +       redacted = value ? redact_arg(value): NULL;
>
> Oh, I do not think I tweaked any of the code, other than fixing the
> new test that was not properly formatted.  Mostly I touched up the
> log message.

I could have been clearer—I think this was in the original. I just
happened to notice it because I was curious about what touch-ups you
performed :)



-- 
D. Ben Knoble

[gitgitgadget]

This patch series was integrated into seen via git@4530787.

[gitgitgadget]

This patch series was integrated into next via git@7dc4bda.

[gitgitgadget]

This branch is now known as am/trace2-with-valueless-true.

[gitgitgadget]

This patch series was integrated into seen via git@91c0577.