Fixed H5Ovisit2() change of behavior between 1.10.11 and v1.14.4.3 #5022
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
H5O__visit() uses the object information to be returned to the application, so when the application did not request for certain information, they were not available to H5O__visit. This lack of information caused incorrect behavior down the road. We now call H5O_get_info again providing H5O_INFO_BASIC for "fields", so we can obtain correct object information for H5O__visit to use. Fixes HDFGroupGH-4941
bmribler
requested review from
lrknox,
derobins,
byrnHDF,
fortnern,
jhendersonHDF,
qkoziol,
vchoi-hdfgroup,
glennsong09,
mattjala and
brtnfld
as code owners
byrnHDF
approved these changes
Oct 28, 2024
qkoziol
approved these changes
Oct 28, 2024
|
Does this need a note in RELEASE.txt? |
bmribler
added
Component - C Library
qkoziol
reviewed
Oct 31, 2024
src/H5Oint.c
Outdated
| @@ -2684,15 +2694,17 @@ H5O__visit(H5G_loc_t *loc, const char *obj_name, H5_index_t idx_type, H5_iter_or | |||
| HGOTO_ERROR(H5E_ID, H5E_CANTREGISTER, FAIL, "unable to register visited object"); | |||
|
|
|||
| /* Make callback for starting object */ | |||
| if ((ret_value = op(obj_id, ".", &oinfo, op_data)) < 0) | |||
| /* if ((ret_value = op(obj_id, ".", oinfop, op_data)) < 0) | |||
qkoziol
reviewed
Oct 31, 2024
src/H5Oint.c
Outdated
| if ((ret_value = op(obj_id, ".", &oinfo, op_data)) < 0) | ||
| /* if ((ret_value = op(obj_id, ".", oinfop, op_data)) < 0) | ||
| */ | ||
| if ((ret_value = op(obj_id, ".", oinfop, op_data)) < 0) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This won't work when the application's fields don't include BASIC. The oinfop will be pointing at the wrong struct.
You can fix it by moving the block of code with the query on the internal oinfo below this point. (I suggest below the check for H5_ITER_CONT)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ah, actually, it was oinfo there before I switched to oinfop, but now I see that oinfo would be the correct one. I'll switch it back unless you disagree.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'll note that no tests were failing when this was wrong. You should probably add a test that fails (now), so you can be certain it's working after you correct it.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hmm, I did add one test that used H5O_INFO_META_SIZE, so no BASIC..., but no failure. OK, back to work... :)
lrknox
previously approved these changes
Nov 1, 2024
scenario introduced by that typo.
|
Oops, I didn't mean to close it. I need to fix a mistake but I'm out right now. |
derobins
added
Priority - 1. High 🔼
derobins
reviewed
Nov 4, 2024
| @@ -1929,6 +2088,8 @@ cleanup_h5o(void H5_ATTR_UNUSED *params) | |||
| { | |||
| h5_fixname(TEST_FILENAME, H5P_DEFAULT, filename, sizeof filename); | |||
| H5Fdelete(filename, H5P_DEFAULT); | |||
| h5_fixname(TEST_FILENAME, H5P_DEFAULT, filename, sizeof filename); | |||
| H5Fdelete(filename, H5P_DEFAULT); | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why is this duplicated? Should this second statement be VISIT2_FILENAME?
qkoziol
approved these changes
Nov 4, 2024
brtnfld
pushed a commit
to brtnfld/hdf5
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 4, 2024
…DFGroup#5022) H5O__visit() uses the object information to be returned to the application, so when the application did not request for certain information, they were not available to H5O__visit. This lack of information caused incorrect behavior down the road. We now call H5O_get_info again providing H5O_INFO_BASIC for "fields", so we can obtain correct object information for H5O__visit to use. Fixes HDFGroup#4941
brtnfld
pushed a commit
to brtnfld/hdf5
that referenced
this pull request
Nov 4, 2024
…DFGroup#5022) H5O__visit() uses the object information to be returned to the application, so when the application did not request for certain information, they were not available to H5O__visit. This lack of information caused incorrect behavior down the road. We now call H5O_get_info again providing H5O_INFO_BASIC for "fields", so we can obtain correct object information for H5O__visit to use. Fixes HDFGroup#4941
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
H5O__visit() uses the object information to be returned to the application, so when the application did not request for certain information, they were not available to H5O__visit(). This lack of information caused incorrect behavior down the road.
We now call H5O_get_info() again providing H5O_INFO_BASIC for "fields", so we can obtain correct object information for H5O__visit() to use.
Fixes GH-4941