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,NICE_REPLY_A, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RCVD_IN_SORBS_WEB,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE shortcircuit=no autolearn=no 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 821381F8C4 for ; Thu, 24 Mar 2022 12:05:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1349893AbiCXMGu (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 Mar 2022 08:06:50 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:50040 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S240561AbiCXMGt (ORCPT ); Thu, 24 Mar 2022 08:06:49 -0400 Received: from mail-pg1-x532.google.com (mail-pg1-x532.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::532]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 51EC19F386 for ; Thu, 24 Mar 2022 05:05:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pg1-x532.google.com with SMTP id t14so3653460pgr.3 for ; Thu, 24 Mar 2022 05:05:17 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=message-id:date:mime-version:user-agent:subject:content-language:to :cc:references:from:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=v/0pEL6REV8i/DSmBAlGG7mf4hayHNIHAyzhEcc1idk=; b=WcBOt2J4wfHUVwP0DQ52He/s6Fyh/BIgbirwAxwhhis5yARm8Ae3dkQYwsfAMGkFAh Et/hIxd6AmtqloarFXxD86nU3eoTpUK3e+lfVnHdHTXVfmuZFaHccuo8UzJYzcQxqRIb 7x3s9eBDCes8nYxGrbsgXSPrSNIeUi0p5aEepDc7SUs8jo7yBsJLQWiace0gvVva9ztT PH5KPJlurrpCSCfhiPCunU2qGEg+AZX1UzS0yoT6ZzAUV1xHn7KIby9tpBH7LrvaNamw bHRumhKd8tgxF4lAJ/47+UWu/GjHDMCNOVD3J9UoSBlxCwb15kuX9GOgAkL58d33iUte f4uQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:message-id:date:mime-version:user-agent:subject :content-language:to:cc:references:from:in-reply-to :content-transfer-encoding; bh=v/0pEL6REV8i/DSmBAlGG7mf4hayHNIHAyzhEcc1idk=; b=0RXQ85H7gfLadRjuQ8XoBjUxg1IHDUPKVyb7vOGCc9qW5Gzq2TFJvJZM1TZFhmMQoE U5rMHVQAlVMSOxXlDb1o2FpyQcEPCfa+iulCecuG4icx+vkke/gQCIFJ8FFJYRonDXHx jWGH/ieMQsoy7kIjkuTFQ9KIbo6j5nH+mxpQ21x4nsXiwdGo9sHmhlt9moh5mI5KgMoV OHqNGM9PHYUr223SU4tzgx7kIBcCrWD5utHd/5shZacCC+ZYDElFxOruVWreoOhhYg5f 5IxgNZuEn3FSQtOm/nvD6g2t32JQMuksPgkYbeUANCzQyAwFFzwv3OIrJZuNj043rjL3 AKuA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533MljDULDd5mj3Vm9uyYUqCqShm4oOktkwO4kwpcYfoaTo95NLG md6b0sTK9O4i5LQdy/Mbiig= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJydGUWkedLihVZP+PsEi9UD+F23e69YHwGEweGe/Bq5QE/9S9/3MF/58kwgO5owgm3SPNOkyQ== X-Received: by 2002:a63:475b:0:b0:382:821b:c17d with SMTP id w27-20020a63475b000000b00382821bc17dmr3885968pgk.250.1648123516640; Thu, 24 Mar 2022 05:05:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.43.80] (subs32-116-206-28-24.three.co.id. [116.206.28.24]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id e10-20020a17090a630a00b001c685cfd9d1sm2829628pjj.20.2022.03.24.05.05.13 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 24 Mar 2022 05:05:15 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <8f7ed9c5-9be6-55b4-f95c-40bf11d9e9ed@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2022 19:05:11 +0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.7.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH] commit-reach: do not parse and iterate minima Content-Language: en-US To: Jonathan Tan , git@vger.kernel.org Cc: stolee@gmail.com References: <20220323210803.1130790-1-jonathantanmy@google.com> From: Bagas Sanjaya In-Reply-To: <20220323210803.1130790-1-jonathantanmy@google.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On 24/03/22 04.08, Jonathan Tan wrote: > However, this is not the case when fetching with --update-shallow. In > post_assign_shallow() in shallow.c, a revision walk is done that also > parses commits at the shallow boundary before updating the shallow > information (and hence, the graft information). (This revision walk > needs to be done before the update because the nature of the update > depends on the outcome of the revision walk.) If we were to > revision-walk such a commit (at the shallow boundary), we would end up > trying and failing to parse its parents because its list of parents is > not empty (since it was parsed before there was any graft information > telling us to conceal its parents). This revision walk will happen if > the client has submodules, as it will revision-walk the fetched commits > to check for new submodules, triggering this bug. > What about fetching with --deepen? Will "unintended" unshallowing with --update-shallow possibly happen if --update-shallow is used, as opposed to --depth/--deepen? -- An old man doll... just what I always wanted! - Clara