From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.2 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM, RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id EFA452021E for ; Thu, 17 Nov 2016 09:20:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752632AbcKQJUA (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Nov 2016 04:20:00 -0500 Received: from mail-wm0-f65.google.com ([74.125.82.65]:32936 "EHLO mail-wm0-f65.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750790AbcKQJT5 (ORCPT ); Thu, 17 Nov 2016 04:19:57 -0500 Received: by mail-wm0-f65.google.com with SMTP id u144so19206891wmu.0 for ; Thu, 17 Nov 2016 01:19:57 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=noEiRBJ3S7H40vSmc+OgLybm43oE4BNj7B0Ok7T3fvc=; b=dtXIMzpydVCPub4fUKikN1Grq+qfOxPPoQHOHBbKktnBoC7sGJkWBFPY+FqMlOok+R veCEZ5lZdLCW69enW+6vmhgFxjmTUxiXXWJn9nEfv6PzPHGm1e33aAqTDXmpnIBER9+P 2lbzEdFLbtDGQga2cCWAOf+nIeL+fFp9+DD2G2NQ/Q+TKtdTnWAcPtRjYhKbyvAk9fwo McTzNdjVgz2Q4SXlLBssXxSD855Kn5ATg4Tm2Z1l/lEp7t4+dAd23CvJioE+EcP8DR7c aFp1Olin1VpFsQBnPLB42i97NbdaT/JbVY7G5CY8vjsNN+lrg+6Zd1CtNO/Em+Ov90U0 3jAg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:cc :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; bh=noEiRBJ3S7H40vSmc+OgLybm43oE4BNj7B0Ok7T3fvc=; b=lhgnG3gSNcyXMhVo1ekxmDqCOvs+JloUCyl13gbqYzvjyKQG6haKZZQVKqKpD83oMF qSNOmyaFkyEyhriZrSLhg3gUrCB8gTSX3iZJgZtfEFfG5ikoB+h6neOAJuFY0+mM5WJf 14JTVOedxsObx0JVcahifoksJ/QUIZ7qi9yIsxcjZHRe76o/F7OLqkiOhqO6eu/VdVeD h/Pc+9S0jURtMJgB2kOgSAsggchfUcT14tTfmtlNyOxtk0zg+VJqiqT1RK6n5Fm9r5k+ EoORi37W2avxiWjCmhrARmK/jRujVsI5ST1+Aqq1SvCX9xQLkv4Hdxu2bn/EtVWDKUkN NlPw== X-Gm-Message-State: AKaTC02EkdBeoZu6YJSAWN5Yj3yON9VOBbx9aiGX/291uOaE/dnFiI52BkccgPp5oE/xTQ== X-Received: by 10.28.144.70 with SMTP id s67mr2716856wmd.138.1479374396171; Thu, 17 Nov 2016 01:19:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.146.248.61] ([62.159.156.210]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id w18sm2669156wme.9.2016.11.17.01.19.55 (version=TLS1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Thu, 17 Nov 2016 01:19:55 -0800 (PST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\)) Subject: Re: RFC: Enable delayed responses to Git clean/smudge filter requests From: Lars Schneider In-Reply-To: Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2016 10:19:54 +0100 Cc: =?utf-8?Q?Jakub_Nar=C4=99bski?= , Eric Wong , git@vger.kernel.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: <20161115010356.GA29602@starla> <5BC69AC1-5499-4F73-816A-D8786106D796@gmail.com> <17709AFF-3C2D-4EC0-97DC-BD750F514D0B@gmail.com> <5eb682e8-13cb-67f2-a8a9-ec1fa1d139c6@gmail.com> To: Junio C Hamano X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3124) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org > On 17 Nov 2016, at 00:46, Junio C Hamano wrote: >=20 > Jakub Nar=C4=99bski writes: >=20 >>> I intend to implement this feature only for the new long running = filter >>> process protocol. OK with you? >>=20 >> If I remember and understand it correctly, current version of long >> running process protocol processes files sequentially, one by one: >> git sends file to filter wholly, and receives response wholly. >>=20 >> In the single-file filter case, git calls filter process as async >> task, in a separate thread, so that one thread feeds the filter, >> and main thread (I think?) reads from it, to avoid deadlocks. >>=20 >> Couldn't something like this be done for long running filter process, >> via protocol extension? >=20 > My reading of the message you are responding to is that Lars means > doing so by "implement this feature". Instead of returning the > filtered bytes, a new protocol lets his filter to say "No result yet > for you to process, ask me later". Correct!