Re: [PATCH 04/67] fsck: don't fsck alternates for connectivity-only check
On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 03:14:24PM -0400, Eric Sunshine wrote: > On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 3:12 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > Jeff King writes: > > > >> Speaking of which, how do you want the next round of patches? I'm > >> hesitant to spam the list with 67 patches again, when only a fraction > >> have changed (and for all but the _to/_r thing, I've posted my changes > >> already). > > > > Cannot tell yet, as I am only halfway thru myself. > > I'm also only about halfway through, plus trying dealing with other topics... OK, I will hold back a resend for a few days, then. -Peff -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: [PATCH 04/67] fsck: don't fsck alternates for connectivity-only check
On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 3:12 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Jeff King writes: > >> Speaking of which, how do you want the next round of patches? I'm >> hesitant to spam the list with 67 patches again, when only a fraction >> have changed (and for all but the _to/_r thing, I've posted my changes >> already). > > Cannot tell yet, as I am only halfway thru myself. I'm also only about halfway through, plus trying dealing with other topics... > If there is a > significant update based on discussions, it may be worth sending > only those so that you can sooner make sure that the resulting > change and those who reviewed the first iteration are all on the > same page, but a full resend, before giving enouth time to those who > are willing to but have not found time to review the whole thing, > would be a wasted mental bandwidth for everybody, I suspect. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: [PATCH 04/67] fsck: don't fsck alternates for connectivity-only check
Jeff King writes: > Speaking of which, how do you want the next round of patches? I'm > hesitant to spam the list with 67 patches again, when only a fraction > have changed (and for all but the _to/_r thing, I've posted my changes > already). Cannot tell yet, as I am only halfway thru myself. If there is a significant update based on discussions, it may be worth sending only those so that you can sooner make sure that the resulting change and those who reviewed the first iteration are all on the same page, but a full resend, before giving enouth time to those who are willing to but have not found time to review the whole thing, would be a wasted mental bandwidth for everybody, I suspect. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: [PATCH 04/67] fsck: don't fsck alternates for connectivity-only check
On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 11:04:49AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Johannes Schindelin writes: > > > Hi Peff, > > > > On 2015-09-15 17:24, Jeff King wrote: > >> Commit 02976bf (fsck: introduce `git fsck --connectivity-only`, > >> 2015-06-22) recently gave fsck an option to perform only a > >> subset of the checks, by skipping the fsck_object_dir() > >> call. However, it does so only for the local object > >> directory, and we still do expensive checks on any alternate > >> repos. We should skip them in this case, too. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Jeff King > > > > ACK! > > Thanks, both. > > Peff, I am inclined to take at least 1 and 4 outside the context of > this series and queue them on their own topics. I do not think > either is too urgent to be in 2.6, but on the other hand they look > both trivially correct (that is a famous last word that often comes > back and haunt us, though), so... Yeah, they are conceptually their own topics, and I do not mind doing it that way. Note that a later patch in the sprintf-audit topic touches the same spot in fsck, and we'll get a nasty conflict if they are done separately. Speaking of which, how do you want the next round of patches? I'm hesitant to spam the list with 67 patches again, when only a fraction have changed (and for all but the _to/_r thing, I've posted my changes already). -Peff -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: [PATCH 04/67] fsck: don't fsck alternates for connectivity-only check
Johannes Schindelin writes: > Hi Peff, > > On 2015-09-15 17:24, Jeff King wrote: >> Commit 02976bf (fsck: introduce `git fsck --connectivity-only`, >> 2015-06-22) recently gave fsck an option to perform only a >> subset of the checks, by skipping the fsck_object_dir() >> call. However, it does so only for the local object >> directory, and we still do expensive checks on any alternate >> repos. We should skip them in this case, too. >> >> Signed-off-by: Jeff King > > ACK! Thanks, both. Peff, I am inclined to take at least 1 and 4 outside the context of this series and queue them on their own topics. I do not think either is too urgent to be in 2.6, but on the other hand they look both trivially correct (that is a famous last word that often comes back and haunt us, though), so... -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Re: [PATCH 04/67] fsck: don't fsck alternates for connectivity-only check
Hi Peff, On 2015-09-15 17:24, Jeff King wrote: > Commit 02976bf (fsck: introduce `git fsck --connectivity-only`, > 2015-06-22) recently gave fsck an option to perform only a > subset of the checks, by skipping the fsck_object_dir() > call. However, it does so only for the local object > directory, and we still do expensive checks on any alternate > repos. We should skip them in this case, too. > > Signed-off-by: Jeff King ACK! Sorry for missing this spot. Dscho -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
[PATCH 04/67] fsck: don't fsck alternates for connectivity-only check
Commit 02976bf (fsck: introduce `git fsck --connectivity-only`,
2015-06-22) recently gave fsck an option to perform only a
subset of the checks, by skipping the fsck_object_dir()
call. However, it does so only for the local object
directory, and we still do expensive checks on any alternate
repos. We should skip them in this case, too.
Signed-off-by: Jeff King
---
builtin/fsck.c | 17 +
1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
diff --git a/builtin/fsck.c b/builtin/fsck.c
index 0794703..46c7235 100644
--- a/builtin/fsck.c
+++ b/builtin/fsck.c
@@ -678,16 +678,17 @@ int cmd_fsck(int argc, const char **argv, const char
*prefix)
git_config(fsck_config, NULL);
fsck_head_link();
- if (!connectivity_only)
+ if (!connectivity_only) {
fsck_object_dir(get_object_directory());
- prepare_alt_odb();
- for (alt = alt_odb_list; alt; alt = alt->next) {
- char namebuf[PATH_MAX];
- int namelen = alt->name - alt->base;
- memcpy(namebuf, alt->base, namelen);
- namebuf[namelen - 1] = 0;
- fsck_object_dir(namebuf);
+ prepare_alt_odb();
+ for (alt = alt_odb_list; alt; alt = alt->next) {
+ char namebuf[PATH_MAX];
+ int namelen = alt->name - alt->base;
+ memcpy(namebuf, alt->base, namelen);
+ namebuf[namelen - 1] = 0;
+ fsck_object_dir(namebuf);
+ }
}
if (check_full) {
--
2.6.0.rc2.408.ga2926b9
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
