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-ASN: AS3215 2.6.0.0/16 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.8 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from out1.vger.email (out1.vger.email [IPv6:2620:137:e000::1:20]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 22F331F8C4 for ; Mon, 28 Mar 2022 07:59:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S238996AbiC1IAw (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Mar 2022 04:00:52 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:48666 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S234805AbiC1IAv (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Mar 2022 04:00:51 -0400 Received: from mail-pf1-x435.google.com (mail-pf1-x435.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::435]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C2AD4220CE for ; Mon, 28 Mar 2022 00:59:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pf1-x435.google.com with SMTP id s11so11837122pfu.13 for ; Mon, 28 Mar 2022 00:59:11 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=pc4Oy7BBCFuyOxVfZqyH8aYbjZFezBWCgn34xw8aGHM=; b=dzfNWWzOdv3ctlEXy7kB8btnmLvOmJyi9v2TLH2yBTfP01KGpExgO3qByVDVkTXpJm 4UoWX4Lk5gCgqIesiOXihj9A2m5mNViT03uyCZsUvAwJDrHRtsr9FnIoD3q2gUfsrjLv jH2EeFC7CQ7586L1bLC+bF/drUwDdslxKonP6/3XQD54vFNP4CEMzi8FdKNpxsgoDmSy NirlNGdEgv5TaMuzKfjTHI3x6UIN+v6YoGjqMY5yAS7hqYAZWz7lJtrer4PrXoMY2AXf lisw8ztqtDd9w8cgRFlSwdbmtTycKNA6Xd/KdvG1ySHCL7FoJ4DWXayNBfUv4tP94Zwn pomA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:in-reply-to :references:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=pc4Oy7BBCFuyOxVfZqyH8aYbjZFezBWCgn34xw8aGHM=; b=gXLo5c43ngfbtmpj7H99DIECcQCUwVzfZ3foS1Gt1TAOr0n2fYhqBjLGdQGEQj2mV/ E8gr6OKkm57gYx0oeD9OUNCFcK/BBIr54nC9mXJPVZKYIWN1zVIdwr4/dKs+K6C+k5Ry RFI6HmZbB7u1B+m2FqQZZJSTzqJhoAtAfmVD2dPJnuIU9L/ymDLO15suvyO4HFsif2KP vFyuX3VvysUjyuy0JrG0ZGfD0ivtkTv0z7ibbLzazlcuxP1fgyo2NmK+C0Ig7oASxm0q iXbUG49lIwkFO4JcJMqIVZB8F0px0OMnkaDuC8UbQ1rNymA4HDo4NlGAgQFb/1MkoT4j Ahxw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530E7ST6bdkCgFaJBwmfPwI/SM0KbA6owAa+5CLBTliPj5EAX/27 W8T5B6e5c8fRfx3XpG0Q4Y0= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzdHzg6ziopytHpdFNh/J6I+5LygDSgHQxRk3J7HvPL1tLF/eSQ3runo9dcUKwWFIshX0F/lw== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6a00:1488:b0:4fa:ac61:8b11 with SMTP id v8-20020a056a00148800b004faac618b11mr22572129pfu.58.1648454351087; Mon, 28 Mar 2022 00:59:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from code-infra-dev-cbj.ea134 ([140.205.70.35]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 135-20020a62198d000000b004fa9a8f73casm15054555pfz.99.2022.03.28.00.59.09 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 28 Mar 2022 00:59:10 -0700 (PDT) From: Teng Long To: me@ttaylorr.com Cc: avarab@gmail.com, derrickstolee@github.com, dyroneteng@gmail.com, git@vger.kernel.org, tenglong.tl@alibaba-inc.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 1/3] pack-bitmap.c: use "ret" in "open_midx_bitmap() Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2022 15:59:07 +0800 Message-Id: <20220328075907.75529-1-dyroneteng@gmail.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.35.1.580.g9912450fc1.dirty In-Reply-To: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 24 Mar 2022 15:11:08 -0400, Taylor Blau wrote: > But thinking about some of my comments on patch 2/3 here, I think that > we don't want to break out of that loop until we have visited both the > MIDX in our repository, as well as any alternates (along with _their_ > alternates, recursively). > > That _is_ a behavior change with respect to the existing implementation > on master, but I think that what's on master is wrong to stop after > looking at the first MIDX bitmap. At least, it's wrong in the same sense > of: "we will only load _one_ of these MIDX bitmaps, so if there is more > than one to choose from, the caller is mistaken". I'm a little wondering that what's the practial meaning for _ do not _ stop after looking at the first MIDX bitmap? Although all MIDX bitmap are scanned, only one of them will eventually work , and there seems to be no guarantee that the last MIDX that works is the most appropriate one? (with the same comfusion applies to non-MIDX bitmap's behavour...) Thanks.