mailing list mirror (one of many)
 help / color / mirror / code / Atom feed
From: Lars Schneider <>
To: Junio C Hamano <>
Cc: Eric Wong <>,
Subject: Re: RFC: Enable delayed responses to Git clean/smudge filter requests
Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2016 10:53:17 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <>

On 15 Nov 2016, at 19:03, Junio C Hamano <> wrote:

> Lars Schneider <> writes:
>>> The filter itself would need to be aware of parallelism
>>> if it lives for multiple objects, right?
>> Correct. This way Git doesn't need to deal with threading...
> I think you need to be careful about three things (at least; there
> may be more):
> * Codepaths that check out multiple cache entries do rely on the
>   order of checkout.  We checkout removals first to make room so
>   that creation of a path X can succeed if an existing path X/Y
>   that used to want to see X as a directory can succeed (see the
>   use of checkout_entry() by "git checkout", which does have two
>   separate loops to explicitly guarantee this), for example.  I
>   think "remove all and then create" you do not specifically have
>   to worry about with the proposed change, but you may need to
>   inspect and verify there aren't other kind of order dependency.


> * Done naively, it will lead to unmaintainable code, like this:
>   + struct list_of_cache_entries *list = ...;
>     for (i = 0; i < active_nr; i++)
>   -    checkout_entry(active_cache[i], state, NULL);
>   +    if (checkout_entry(active_cache[i], state, NULL) == DELAYED)
>   +       add_cache_to_queue(&list, active_cache[i]);
>   + while (list) {
>   +    wait_for_checkout_to_finish(*list);
>   +    list = list->next;
>   + }
>   I do not think we want to see such a rewrite all over the
>   codepaths.  It might be OK to add such a "these entries are known
>   to be delayed" list in struct checkout so that the above becomes
>   more like this:
>     for (i = 0; i < active_nr; i++)
>        checkout_entry(active_cache[i], state, NULL);
>   + checkout_entry_finish(state);
>   That is, addition of a single "some of the checkout_entry() calls
>   done so far might have been lazy, and I'll give them a chance to
>   clean up" might be palatable.  Anything more than that on the
>   caller side is not.

I haven't thought hard about the implementation, yet, but I'll try 
to stick to your suggestion and change as less code as possible on 
the caller sides.

> * You'd need to rein in the maximum parallelism somehow, as you do
>   not want to see hundreds of competing filter processes starting
>   only to tell the main loop over an index with hundreds of entries
>   that they are delayed checkouts.

I intend to implement this feature only for the new long running filter
process protocol. OK with you?


  reply	other threads:[~2016-11-16  9:53 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-11-14 21:09 RFC: Enable delayed responses to Git clean/smudge filter requests Lars Schneider
2016-11-15  1:03 ` Eric Wong
2016-11-15 14:29   ` Lars Schneider
2016-11-15 18:03     ` Junio C Hamano
2016-11-16  9:53       ` Lars Schneider [this message]
2016-11-16 18:15         ` Junio C Hamano
2016-11-16 18:47           ` Lars Schneider
2016-11-16 19:19             ` Junio C Hamano
2016-11-16 22:41         ` Jakub Narębski
2016-11-16 23:46           ` Junio C Hamano
2016-11-17  9:19             ` Lars Schneider
2016-11-24 15:45       ` Lars Schneider
2016-11-28 21:48         ` Junio C Hamano
2016-11-15 18:27     ` Eric Wong
2017-01-09 20:44 ` Stefan Beller
2017-01-11 12:57   ` Lars Schneider

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:

  List information:

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \ \ \ \ \ \

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).