Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Use CleanPath instead of path.Clean #23371

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Mar 8, 2023
Merged

Conversation

lunny
Copy link
Member

@lunny lunny commented Mar 8, 2023

As title.

@lunny lunny added the type/refactoring Existing code has been cleaned up. There should be no new functionality. label Mar 8, 2023
Copy link
Member

@delvh delvh left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM. I just confirmed that you refactored every instance of it.

modules/options/repo.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@GiteaBot GiteaBot added lgtm/need 1 This PR needs approval from one additional maintainer to be merged. labels Mar 8, 2023
@delvh delvh added the outdated/backport/v1.19 This PR should be backported to Gitea 1.19 label Mar 8, 2023
@GiteaBot GiteaBot added lgtm/done This PR has enough approvals to get merged. There are no important open reservations anymore. and removed lgtm/need 1 This PR needs approval from one additional maintainer to be merged. labels Mar 8, 2023
@delvh delvh added the reviewed/wait-merge This pull request is part of the merge queue. It will be merged soon. label Mar 8, 2023
@lunny lunny added this to the 1.20.0 milestone Mar 8, 2023
@lunny lunny merged commit b116418 into go-gitea:main Mar 8, 2023
@lunny lunny deleted the lunny/clean_path branch March 8, 2023 12:17
@lunny lunny removed the reviewed/wait-merge This pull request is part of the merge queue. It will be merged soon. label Mar 8, 2023
zjjhot added a commit to zjjhot/gitea that referenced this pull request Mar 9, 2023
* giteaofficial/main:
  Test renderReadmeFile (go-gitea#23185)
  [skip ci] Updated translations via Crowdin
  Set `X-Gitea-Debug` header once (go-gitea#23361)
  Improve cache context (go-gitea#23330)
  add user visibility in dashboard navbar (go-gitea#22747)
  Fix panic when getting notes by ref (go-gitea#23372)
  Use CleanPath instead of path.Clean (go-gitea#23371)
  Reduce duplicate and useless code in options (go-gitea#23369)
  Clean Path in Options (go-gitea#23006)
  Do not recognize text files as audio (go-gitea#23355)
  Fix incorrect display for comment context menu  (go-gitea#23343)

# Conflicts:
#	templates/repo/issue/view_content/context_menu.tmpl
@GiteaBot
Copy link
Contributor

GiteaBot commented Mar 9, 2023

I was unable to create a backport for 1.19, please send one manually. 🍵

@GiteaBot GiteaBot added the backport/manual No power to the bots! Create your backport yourself! label Mar 9, 2023
@wolfogre wolfogre added backport/done All backports for this PR have been created and removed backport/manual No power to the bots! Create your backport yourself! labels Mar 13, 2023
@@ -44,7 +45,7 @@ func storageHandler(storageSetting setting.Storage, prefix string, objStore stor
routing.UpdateFuncInfo(req.Context(), funcInfo)

rPath := strings.TrimPrefix(req.URL.Path, "/"+prefix+"/")
rPath = path.Clean("/" + strings.ReplaceAll(rPath, "\\", "/"))[1:]
rPath = util.CleanPath(strings.ReplaceAll(rPath, "\\", "/"))
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is wrong and is going to result in it being possible to have rPath have a preceding "/" whereas previously it was impossible.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

If rPath has a / prefix, it will be invoked with path.Clean directly. I think it should be better than the current logic.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

util.CleanPath will result in rPath still having the / whereas previous it would always be removed.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Even if util.CleanPath here will not convert absolute path to relative path, but line 47 will ensure rPath is a relative path.

Copy link
Contributor

@wxiaoguang wxiaoguang Mar 13, 2023

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think we need clear definitions for every case, instead of using unpredictable CleanPath behavior.

The unstable part is :

  • CleanPath("/path") => /path
  • CleanPath("path") => path

But in many cases, we the caller only wants path.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

But that's not CleanPath's problem. I sent #23446 to fix possible unclear places

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think the problem is that CleanPath's behavior is not that stable in many cases.

Callers should always know what they need - absolute or relative - no matter what path has been passed in the util function.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

absolute or relative should not be the responsibility of CleanPath. It should be decided out of the function. Or we can rename CleanPath to CleanAndEnsureRelativePath.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Hmm .. that's a disagreement: I do not think so about "absolute or relative should not be the responsibility of CleanPath. It should be decided out of the function."

IMO maybe it could be (like #23441)

rel := util.PathRelJoin(....)   //  `/path` => `path`,  `path` => `path`
abs := path.Join("/", util.PathRelJoin(....))  // if necessary

@zeripath
Copy link
Contributor

There are many issues with this PR. In many places the previous code absolutely ensured that a path could not start with a "/" which is this PR will no longer protect against.

@@ -207,7 +207,7 @@ func LFSLockFile(ctx *context.Context) {
ctx.Redirect(ctx.Repo.RepoLink + "/settings/lfs/locks")
return
}
lockPath = path.Clean("/" + lockPath)[1:]
lockPath = util.CleanPath(lockPath)
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This can result in a lockPath with a preceding "/". This is wrong.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

and everywhere else too

@@ -44,7 +45,7 @@ func storageHandler(storageSetting setting.Storage, prefix string, objStore stor
routing.UpdateFuncInfo(req.Context(), funcInfo)

rPath := strings.TrimPrefix(req.URL.Path, "/"+prefix+"/")
rPath = path.Clean("/" + strings.ReplaceAll(rPath, "\\", "/"))[1:]
rPath = util.CleanPath(strings.ReplaceAll(rPath, "\\", "/"))
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

util.CleanPath will result in rPath still having the / whereas previous it would always be removed.

Comment on lines +19 to +22
if strings.HasPrefix(p, "/") {
return path.Clean(p)
}
return path.Clean("/" + p)[1:]
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I just read through the documentation of the method, this whole block is unnecessary and can be replaced with return path.Clean("/" + p)[1:].
That way, we ensure that the path is cleaned and that it is a relative path.
If we always want relative paths, we can just use that instead.
So the question is rather: Is there any use case where we need to clean an absolute path?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I just read through the documentation of the method, this whole block is unnecessary and can be replaced with return path.Clean("/" + p)[1:]. That way, we ensure that the path is cleaned and that it is a relative path. If we always want relative paths, we can just use that instead. So the question is rather: Is there any use case where we need to clean an absolute path?

I don't think so except we rename the function to CleanAndEnsureRelativePath.

@wolfogre wolfogre removed the backport/done All backports for this PR have been created label Mar 16, 2023
@GiteaBot
Copy link
Contributor

I was unable to create a backport for 1.19, please send one manually. 🍵

@GiteaBot GiteaBot added the backport/manual No power to the bots! Create your backport yourself! label Mar 16, 2023
@lunny lunny removed this from the 1.20.0 milestone Mar 16, 2023
@delvh delvh removed outdated/backport/v1.19 This PR should be backported to Gitea 1.19 backport/manual No power to the bots! Create your backport yourself! labels Mar 17, 2023
jolheiser pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 21, 2023
Since #23493 has conflicts with latest commits, this PR is my proposal
for fixing #23371

Details are in the comments

And refactor the `modules/options` module, to make it always use
"filepath" to access local files.

Benefits:

* No need to do `util.CleanPath(strings.ReplaceAll(p, "\\", "/"))),
"/")` any more (not only one before)
* The function behaviors are clearly defined
@delvh delvh added the skip-changelog This PR is irrelevant for the (next) changelog, for example bug fixes for unreleased features. label Apr 3, 2023
@delvh delvh added this to the 1.20.0 milestone Apr 3, 2023
@go-gitea go-gitea locked and limited conversation to collaborators May 3, 2023
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
lgtm/done This PR has enough approvals to get merged. There are no important open reservations anymore. skip-changelog This PR is irrelevant for the (next) changelog, for example bug fixes for unreleased features. type/refactoring Existing code has been cleaned up. There should be no new functionality.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants