git@vger.kernel.org mailing list mirror (one of many)
 help / color / mirror / code / Atom feed
From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
To: "René Scharfe" <l.s.r@web.de>
Cc: "Git List" <git@vger.kernel.org>,
	"Martin Ågren" <martin.agren@gmail.com>,
	"Christian Couder" <christian.couder@gmail.com>,
	"Junio C Hamano" <gitster@pobox.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 5/9] bisect: avoid using the rev_info flag leak_pending
Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2018 03:07:54 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20180110080754.GE16315@sigill.intra.peff.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <07d0e0c6-d023-bd28-511b-78092cb35b4f@web.de>

On Mon, Dec 25, 2017 at 06:45:36PM +0100, René Scharfe wrote:

> The leak_pending flag is so awkward to use that multiple comments had to
> be added around each occurrence.  We only use it for remembering the
> commits whose marks we have to clear after checking if all of the good
> ones are ancestors of the bad one.  This is easy, though: We need to do
> that for the bad and good commits, of course.

Are we sure that our list is the same as what is traversed? I won't be
surprised if it is true, but it doesn't seem immediately obvious from
the code:

> -static int check_ancestors(const char *prefix)
> +static int check_ancestors(int rev_nr, struct commit **rev, const char *prefix)
>  {

So now we take in a set of objects...

>  	struct rev_info revs;
> -	struct object_array pending_copy;
>  	int res;
>  
>  	bisect_rev_setup(&revs, prefix, "^%s", "%s", 0);

But those objects aren't provided here. bisect_rev_setup() puts its own
set of objects into the pending list...

> -	/* Save pending objects, so they can be cleaned up later. */
> -	pending_copy = revs.pending;
> -	revs.leak_pending = 1;
> -
> -	/*
> -	 * bisect_common calls prepare_revision_walk right away, which
> -	 * (together with .leak_pending = 1) makes us the sole owner of
> -	 * the list of pending objects.
> -	 */
>  	bisect_common(&revs);
>  	res = (revs.commits != NULL);

And then we traverse, and then...

>  
>  	/* Clean up objects used, as they will be reused. */
> -	clear_commit_marks_for_object_array(&pending_copy, ALL_REV_FLAGS);
> -
> -	object_array_clear(&pending_copy);
> +	clear_commit_marks_many(rev_nr, rev, ALL_REV_FLAGS);

...this is the first time we look at "rev".

If we already have the list of tips, could we just feed it ourselves to
bisect_rev_setup (I think that would require us remembering which were
"good" and "bad", but that doesn't seem like a big deal).

I'm not overly concerned that you've introduced a bug here, but just
wondering if we could make this a bit more maintainable going forward.

-Peff

  reply	other threads:[~2018-01-10  8:08 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-12-16 12:12 [PATCH] revision: introduce prepare_revision_walk_extended() René Scharfe
2017-12-17 10:20 ` Martin Ågren
2017-12-18 15:10 ` Jeff King
2017-12-18 19:18   ` René Scharfe
2017-12-19 11:49     ` Jeff King
2017-12-19 18:33       ` Junio C Hamano
2017-12-20 13:08         ` Jeff King
2017-12-21 18:41           ` René Scharfe
2017-12-24 14:22             ` Jeff King
2017-12-25 17:36               ` René Scharfe
2017-12-25 17:41 ` [PATCH v2 0/9] revision: get rid of the flag leak_pending René Scharfe
2017-12-25 17:43   ` [PATCH v2 1/9] commit: avoid allocation in clear_commit_marks_many() René Scharfe
2018-01-10  7:54     ` Jeff King
2017-12-25 17:44   ` [PATCH v2 2/9] commit: use clear_commit_marks_many() in remove_redundant() René Scharfe
2017-12-25 17:44   ` [PATCH v2 3/9] ref-filter: use clear_commit_marks_many() in do_merge_filter() René Scharfe
2017-12-25 17:44   ` [PATCH v2 4/9] object: add clear_commit_marks_all() René Scharfe
2018-01-10  7:58     ` Jeff King
2018-01-11 18:57       ` René Scharfe
2018-01-12 15:20         ` Jeff King
2017-12-25 17:45   ` [PATCH v2 5/9] bisect: avoid using the rev_info flag leak_pending René Scharfe
2018-01-10  8:07     ` Jeff King [this message]
2018-01-11 18:57       ` René Scharfe
2018-01-12 15:23         ` Jeff King
2017-12-25 17:46   ` [PATCH v2 6/9] bundle: " René Scharfe
2017-12-28 21:13     ` Junio C Hamano
2018-01-10  8:18     ` Jeff King
2017-12-25 17:47   ` [PATCH v2 7/9] checkout: " René Scharfe
2017-12-28 21:24     ` Junio C Hamano
2017-12-25 17:47   ` [PATCH v2 8/9] revision: remove the unused " René Scharfe
2017-12-25 17:48   ` [PATCH v2 9/9] commit: remove unused function clear_commit_marks_for_object_array() René Scharfe
2017-12-28 20:32   ` [PATCH v2 0/9] revision: get rid of the flag leak_pending Junio C Hamano
2018-01-10  8:20   ` Jeff King

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:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

  List information: http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

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

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20180110080754.GE16315@sigill.intra.peff.net \
    --to=peff@peff.net \
    --cc=christian.couder@gmail.com \
    --cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=gitster@pobox.com \
    --cc=l.s.r@web.de \
    --cc=martin.agren@gmail.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* 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

	https://80x24.org/mirrors/git.git

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).