From: Oleg Taranenko <olegtaranenko@gmail.com>
To: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Cc: Ben Peart <peartben@gmail.com>, git <git@vger.kernel.org>,
pclouds@gmail.com, Ben Peart <benpeart@microsoft.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] checkout: eliminate unnecessary merge for trivial checkout
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2016 08:30:49 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CABEd3j_FrWhOe_jXcc+VJWiyy80SG1JfbZC9woRU2cqdzjkGyA@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <xmqq7fafv376.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com>
Sorry for bothering, why not introduce a brand new option like git
checkout -b foo --skip-worktree-merge for such rare optimization use
case?
On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 12:34 AM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
> Ben Peart <peartben@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> +static int needs_working_tree_merge(const struct checkout_opts *opts,
>> + const struct branch_info *old,
>> + const struct branch_info *new)
>> +{
>> +...
>> +}
>
> I do not think I need to repeat the same remarks on the conditions
> in this helper, which hasn't changed since v2. Many "comments" in
> the code do not explain why skipping is justified, or what they
> claim to check looks to me just plain wrong.
>
> For example, there is
>
> /*
> * If we're not creating a new branch, by definition we're changing
> * the existing one so need to do the merge
> */
> if (!opts->new_branch)
> return 1;
>
> but "git checkout" (no other argument) hits this condition. It
> disables the most trivial optimization opportunity, because we are
> not "creating".
>
> "By definition, we're changing"? Really? Not quite.
>
> If you disable this bogus check, "git checkout" (no other argument)
> would be allowed to skip the merge_working_tree(), and that in turn
> reveals another case that the helper is not checking when
> unpack_trees() MUST be called.
>
> Note: namely, when sparse checkout is in effect, switching from
> HEAD to HEAD can nuke existing working tree files outside the
> sparse pattern -- YUCK! See penultimate test in t1011 for
> an example.
>
> This yuckiness is not your fault, but needs_working_tree_merge()
> logic you added needs to refrain from skipping unpack_trees() call
> when sparse thing is in effect. I'd expect "git checkout -b foo"
> instead of "git checkout" (no other argument) would fail to honor
> the sparse thing and reveal this bug, because the above bogus
> "!opts->new_branch" check will not protect you for that case.
>
> In other words, these random series of "if (...) return 1" are bugs
> hiding other real bugs and we need to reason about which ones are
> bugs that are hiding what other bugs that are not covered by this
> function. As Peff said earlier for v1, this is still an unreadable
> mess. We need to figure out a way to make sure we are skipping on
> the right condition and not accidentally hiding a bug of failing to
> check the right condition. I offhand do not have a good suggestion
> on this; sorry.
>
>> static int merge_working_tree(const struct checkout_opts *opts,
>> struct branch_info *old,
>> struct branch_info *new,
>> int *writeout_error)
>> {
>> + /*
>> + * Optimize the performance of "git checkout -b foo" by avoiding
>> + * the expensive merge, index and working directory updates if they
>> + * are not needed.
>> + */
>> + if (!needs_working_tree_merge(opts, old, new))
>> + return 0;
>> +
>> int ret;
>> struct lock_file *lock_file = xcalloc(1, sizeof(struct lock_file));
>
> With the change you made at the beginning of this function, it no
> longer compiles with -Wdecl-after-stmt, but that is the smallest of
> the problems.
>
> It is a small step in the right direction to move the call to the
> helper from the caller to this function, but it is a bit too small.
>
> Notice that the lines after the above context look like this:
>
> hold_locked_index(lock_file, 1);
> if (read_cache_preload(NULL) < 0)
> return error(_("index file corrupt"));
>
> resolve_undo_clear();
> if (opts->force) {
> ret = reset_tree(new->commit->tree, opts, 1, writeout_error);
> if (ret)
> return ret;
> } else {
> struct tree_desc trees[2];
> ...
>
> I would have expected that the check goes inside the "else" thing
> that actually does a two-tree merge, and the helper loses the check
> with opts->force, at least. That would still be a change smaller
> than desired, but at least a meaningful improvement compared to the
> previous one. As I have already pointed out, in the "else" clause
> there is a check "is the index free of conflicted entries? if so
> error out", and that must be honored in !opt->force case, no matter
> what your needs_working_tree_merge() says. I also was hoping that
> you would notice, when you were told about the unmerged check, by
> reading the remainder of the merge_working_tree(), that we need to
> call show_local_changes() when we are not doing force and when we
> are not quiet---returning early like the above patch will never be
> able to call that one downstream in the function.
>
> Regardless of what the actual checks end up to be, the right place
> to do this "optimization" would look more like:
>
> builtin/checkout.c | 7 ++++++-
> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/builtin/checkout.c b/builtin/checkout.c
> index 2b50a49..a6b9e17 100644
> --- a/builtin/checkout.c
> +++ b/builtin/checkout.c
> @@ -508,14 +508,19 @@ static int merge_working_tree(const struct checkout_opts *opts,
> topts.dir->flags |= DIR_SHOW_IGNORED;
> setup_standard_excludes(topts.dir);
> }
> +
> + if ( we know we can skip the unpack ) {
> + ret = 0;
> + } else {
> tree = parse_tree_indirect(old->commit ?
> old->commit->object.oid.hash :
> EMPTY_TREE_SHA1_BIN);
> init_tree_desc(&trees[0], tree->buffer, tree->size);
> tree = parse_tree_indirect(new->commit->object.oid.hash);
> init_tree_desc(&trees[1], tree->buffer, tree->size);
> -
> ret = unpack_trees(2, trees, &topts);
> + }
> +
> if (ret == -1) {
> /*
> * Unpack couldn't do a trivial merge; either
>
> I'd think. Note that the determination of "we can skip" would
> involve knowing the object names of the two trees involved, so for
> performance reasons, some of the parse-tree calls may have to come
> before the call to "do we know we can skip?", but that does not
> fundamentally change the basic code structure.
>
> Thanks.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-09-14 6:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-09-13 14:26 [PATCH v3] checkout: eliminate unnecessary merge for trivial checkout Ben Peart
2016-09-13 22:34 ` Junio C Hamano
2016-09-14 6:30 ` Oleg Taranenko [this message]
2016-09-14 15:48 ` Junio C Hamano
[not found] ` <BL2PR03MB3232D3128A72D4EC9ADC2C6F4F10@BL2PR03MB323.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
[not found] ` <BL2PR03MB323E1B2F810C63CB01AA234F4F30@BL2PR03MB323.namprd03.prod.outlook.com>
2016-09-19 13:18 ` Ben Peart
2016-09-19 16:30 ` Junio C Hamano
2016-09-19 17:03 ` Junio C Hamano
2016-09-21 18:32 ` Ben Peart
2016-09-24 14:28 ` Philip Oakley
2016-09-24 18:26 ` Junio C Hamano
2016-09-24 19:31 ` Philip Oakley
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2016-09-28 17:02 Ben Peart
2016-09-28 17:52 ` Junio C Hamano
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=CABEd3j_FrWhOe_jXcc+VJWiyy80SG1JfbZC9woRU2cqdzjkGyA@mail.gmail.com \
--to=olegtaranenko@gmail.com \
--cc=benpeart@microsoft.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=pclouds@gmail.com \
--cc=peartben@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).