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: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.7 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,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id B7EA31F45F for ; Thu, 9 May 2019 12:11:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726533AbfEIMLp (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 May 2019 08:11:45 -0400 Received: from mail-qk1-f196.google.com ([209.85.222.196]:42622 "EHLO mail-qk1-f196.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726141AbfEIMLp (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 May 2019 08:11:45 -0400 Received: by mail-qk1-f196.google.com with SMTP id d4so1248874qkc.9 for ; Thu, 09 May 2019 05:11:45 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=C2S83Q5JqdcspSMELb8hx4rRAOh6lP+zXIycBlmGIFo=; b=bR51sHV3Po8jMhPY3Lmihy37hdZhNy9a3/aiWUzNKfFTtH320QtDT6enfh2kmwjbfk TQpJKdBfL0AiS8Tnl1y8cjpu8t0cW5BZgXRGmeCL+r/NdO5ubyVlWV4N4uZBkcrWmUOZ G7QNVRylmNshluNMcDhghatiDnU52lH8RNtMi6GV4x4eTaCoHUjWgXT0vyG5sRlwdx9b Bx1WU20fn+QE3/WG8oiiX6WrwcQ1EhNKcq8XX8K+Y7KcONG1x8qqn/17/ciRpY2NRE34 qhLSvd0tIvJog8/l3KbQRaNxKZ7yt34yKH6YJmMOUjGCrEFlcQ+fyUxmO+UfZyQQwNos nbDQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=C2S83Q5JqdcspSMELb8hx4rRAOh6lP+zXIycBlmGIFo=; b=AQ3AqngipqyNP13junT1g7UiYitdIIns1QVYkRicUlq+9aCfsHJYyxTD2km+i633nm 6dj/ILnPcd6nrkVuTmyJ8eJkrs+kww9TKkrcOoySa5UmyRoraunIeH2VaTXaAabs20ou hsuc2NMeCYjlgQw02/e/IehzzSdQYN0n/BicE+nNZwdCkFCDNjtz0PXatvr51+xKl81J e4RZo/pR1WJI25PbIoVB91biLBFVileAxBwbm1Ce/3qQ98+WwADbrmcEOJm6lgvqvYyN 76q/4BBy9aZHfvm36ayFYmzl7DJW4EArrxHBWQRu9c4FaoaYdvBPUCk81hUny88FBQ+M 4knw== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAVCx6KA0OZL4bxnU4P4VR2/GoIs9NWtNdDmf3evAb0LxnzBWXC8 FaNvzCN+Kw9LFyUvTqIS4iPjtBcD7pg= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqyTpzHnWknCK1giNz+VLGKqLx0ieQLJ0VzPe3p53V31zkzFt5K17nZaMuhLuY5AhHBFsY8MMQ== X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:16c3:: with SMTP id a3mr2946104qkn.222.1557403904314; Thu, 09 May 2019 05:11:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?IPv6:2001:4898:6808:13e:d14c:17a3:d28e:9336? ([2001:4898:8010:0:ba82:17a3:d28e:9336]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id o44sm1235710qto.36.2019.05.09.05.11.43 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=AEAD-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 09 May 2019 05:11:43 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/19] revision.h: avoid bit fields in struct rev_info To: Duy Nguyen Cc: Git Mailing List References: <20190508111249.15262-1-pclouds@gmail.com> <20190508111249.15262-2-pclouds@gmail.com> <0509589b-7a92-6c05-e404-65a9b2bf5666@gmail.com> From: Derrick Stolee Message-ID: <554a318d-117a-b223-ee45-7cdcac2054f9@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 9 May 2019 08:11:43 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:67.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/67.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On 5/9/2019 5:56 AM, Duy Nguyen wrote: > On Wed, May 8, 2019 at 10:52 PM Derrick Stolee wrote: >> >> The biggest issue with my suggestion is that it requires changing the >> consumers of the options, as they would no longer live directly on the >> rev_info struct. That would be a big change, even if it could be done >> with string replacement. > > I agree rev_info has grown "wild". It's quite ancient code. As you > noted, it's a big change. And since my series is already long (76 > patches), I would rather focus on just one thing, rewriting the > parsing code with minimum changes to anything else, preferably retain > the exact same old behavior. > > After that work is done (and no regression found), we could focus on > reorganizing rev_info, which could be quite "interesting". Some fields > may be overloaded with different purposes, which I just can't spend > time investigating now. There's also the problem with freeing > resources after rev-list is done, which I think we have ignored so > far. Thanks for humoring me. I agree with your reasoning. This series looks good to me. Thanks, -Stolee