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=-3.6 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,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 C5F2620323 for ; Wed, 22 Mar 2017 21:06:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932627AbdCVVF5 (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Mar 2017 17:05:57 -0400 Received: from siwi.pair.com ([209.68.5.199]:21460 "EHLO siwi.pair.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932208AbdCVVFy (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Mar 2017 17:05:54 -0400 Received: from [10.160.98.126] (unknown [167.220.148.155]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by siwi.pair.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1759E845D3; Wed, 22 Mar 2017 17:04:58 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/6] thread lazy_init_name_hash To: Junio C Hamano References: <1490202865-31325-1-git-send-email-git@jeffhostetler.com> Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, peff@peff.net, Jeff Hostetler From: Jeff Hostetler Message-ID: <1a23fa5d-3b80-ca47-fcaa-56f794699aab@jeffhostetler.com> Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2017 17:04:49 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On 3/22/2017 4:54 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Junio C Hamano writes: > >>> This patch series replaces my earlier >>> * jh/memihash-opt (2017-02-17) 5 commits >>> patch series. >> >> Ahh. I was scratching my head trying to remember why some of these >> look so familiar. [PATCH v2 ...] would have helped. >> >> Thank you for an update. > > One notable difference I noticed since the previous round is that > this no longer adds precomputed hash to "struct cache_entry". As > you are aiming to manage an index with a large number of entries, > this is a welcome change that makes sense. Yes, this completely isolates the changes inside the name-hash.c code. And it eliminates the need to update/invalidate the precomputed hash values as entries are changed. > > $ make NO_PTHREADS=NoThanks name-hash.o > CC name-hash.o > name-hash.c: In function 'lazy_init_name_hash': > ... > still has to be addressed. Perhaps squash pieces of these into > appropriate patches in the series? > ... Will do. I wasn't sure how you specified non-threaded builds. Thanks, Jeff