From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-11.4 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_MED, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS,USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2A10D1F4B4 for ; Mon, 7 Dec 2020 18:29:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726265AbgLGS1Q (ORCPT ); Mon, 7 Dec 2020 13:27:16 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:48958 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725781AbgLGS1Q (ORCPT ); Mon, 7 Dec 2020 13:27:16 -0500 Received: from mail-qt1-x84a.google.com (mail-qt1-x84a.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::84a]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2D765C061793 for ; Mon, 7 Dec 2020 10:26:36 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-qt1-x84a.google.com with SMTP id o12so11823574qtw.14 for ; Mon, 07 Dec 2020 10:26:36 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=sender:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references:subject :from:to:cc; bh=IAJd+AZc9XnXu6Q8DIAAwbmFBsuy1xLhtQ3j5dTK2GE=; b=pC0moBYLl4QXR5eEYVWqWA53MnxLX5q3kji6YZtcIM0DG0Q3/yxR0DP75C7/sT5X45 OVQMVmL0bjQbvZvLdB7X4f2KPuS1NCcjvNBnAagu6WvJI2hFgqOBp1j7HsqoeQuKyqi1 pRz1sXZ1iN28UmLn1+DSfzSAPhYTsQ3z6fMJhxnLeHrytTg+nG+nvVJJ4zNzDMMe9MLh lQqX6/G+91kDuoSs49oy1zPUYfrHgApTvdzqCCYxZ9wHnHAk7vhmhACVhObmNg70nCA6 rEYOPRWqmWeUuRnmqVVsqrZ2lBBq+ZS7x8JjNFyQV9SlJKw8BCNo4jG16DHDw8wC7Y8z CNWA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :references:subject:from:to:cc; bh=IAJd+AZc9XnXu6Q8DIAAwbmFBsuy1xLhtQ3j5dTK2GE=; b=Dof3B5Up3DSXZBSXU7obX0o25Rufi0L9UkVFNzrdrtGplaDPdlvhjkF8FyPKKDf+yS vHFvg9YLo1dKmWN1cvM9BloHAaH/cLBt0ZLNeTD/0O0s26UxyBlHJqImkludAmdIf6I9 2WTpGc9YOqD1WkQSa7cs+Pnb6+v6COBtEXGibjP7PgVRzLCsx6DGYE1BxRrHrsx+ivRR R2BG8sMuBJfRbochqVhW7r3d5R1ETCUvOXMBkTAzvmeHXBc3q5FjmZ8RxLALJ2ddK79f iyEF0XdK3Aba5zlRrMbnshfRJm8X2OgxNtfJBXcfnp8ZKDxeEDy5PLWVKL8SL7nhoJQD 0JBQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532BcHRfkN+rB0aEkflZxFgwRE8iHxRqziVB77+ylUI5I9ZwKmJH cVplFgBW7DDMPCximhO1fk81faUV8x3jzl197DDI X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwnrftL8xpZ/AcXR0gpkBGuXxWkM01OUOlqi+hl66LdojMSGs4Lf0KoUgmGZvmnkciFTP5V+IHP9i29QIB5CBpp Sender: "jonathantanmy via sendgmr" X-Received: from twelve4.c.googlers.com ([fda3:e722:ac3:10:24:72f4:c0a8:437a]) (user=jonathantanmy job=sendgmr) by 2002:a0c:f981:: with SMTP id t1mr22588921qvn.60.1607365595260; Mon, 07 Dec 2020 10:26:35 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 7 Dec 2020 10:26:33 -0800 In-Reply-To: Message-Id: <20201207182633.3036948-1-jonathantanmy@google.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 References: X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.29.2.576.ga3fc446d84-goog Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 24/24] pack-bitmap-write: better reuse bitmaps From: Jonathan Tan To: me@ttaylorr.com Cc: jonathantanmy@google.com, stolee@gmail.com, git@vger.kernel.org, dstolee@microsoft.com, gitster@pobox.com, peff@peff.net, martin.agren@gmail.com, szeder.dev@gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org > On Wed, Dec 02, 2020 at 01:22:27PM -0500, Derrick Stolee wrote: > > >> We could even skip the whole maximal stuff (for commits with existing > > >> bitmaps) and replace "c_ent->maximal = 1;" above with "add to list that > > >> we're going to append to bb->commits at the very end". That has the > > >> advantage of not having to redefine "maximal". > > > > > > Hmm. I'd trust Stolee's opinion over mine here, so I'll be curious what > > > he has to say. > > > > It would be equivalent to add it to the list and then continuing the > > loop instead of piggy-backing on the if (c_ent->maximal) block, followed > > by a trivial loop over the (nullified) parents. > > Jonathan: does that seem OK to you to leave it as-is? If you don't have > strong objections, I'll go ahead with sending v3 a little later today. Like I (just) said in [1], I think that my comment stands, but this is a minor and local issue that does not affect the functionality of the overall patch set so I think you can go ahead and send v3. [1] https://lore.kernel.org/git/20201207182418.3034961-1-jonathantanmy@google.com/