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: AS53758 23.128.96.0/24 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.3 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, SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS 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 EE76E1F852 for ; Fri, 14 Jan 2022 09:13:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S233501AbiANJNB (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 Jan 2022 04:13:01 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:34346 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S231493AbiANJNA (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 Jan 2022 04:13:00 -0500 Received: from mail-ua1-x92c.google.com (mail-ua1-x92c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::92c]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 82D64C061574 for ; Fri, 14 Jan 2022 01:13:00 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-ua1-x92c.google.com with SMTP id i5so15793988uaq.10 for ; Fri, 14 Jan 2022 01:13:00 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=ZN2WI3PoRzakjzHNo3sflH5Fv27SMKewmeVPK87kwho=; b=VZ1lxH9RV2uDxQ5mwLpleXPdm457y3XSalNElD2Slat4wAf4suDojpoeP05ERkN4+0 kg8WpObjDFmTpIp8vrONtQVVwdDeEc6s3Uyx8hI47EJMLmva4cgJVVVUuERzhtGeRWuN eOHLc1+NOJhPbYPO7EmRIUGHZlcsHj4eHPU2Lice3aVjjNdS3md5flMdroSc8jcIpxd1 CcrqkWJJl0P2TLPCgjOM+fW0g+9i8gymGRGwxA59tqMsQfHxRwDaKyVcFBxut7JEqUUB MIdyx3ErGWduW+2Rc/RbqwfK8o7r5nglPlG9tvyegWTHayuD4sus9LMVIe09pbFmQwey x2sw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=ZN2WI3PoRzakjzHNo3sflH5Fv27SMKewmeVPK87kwho=; b=esTTqfhezTFVjM6QRSceDXLIWeyNBjxLPBdX/lOb5HG/HStUytvWt2W4ZFbhrLko0G XpUX+4st+7sPr3heVcxclXwgHuFe8hJaBSFAtVqiHodZlLKviHSmcA4TQ/0sDDBBVLsa pBxOoUzW8QTKGoCBeckSkHMiyx1zAcRXCM/6TVlU75mdqURX6dN8ByWC67YYYnlObsjB QS2TN0FGipDidCK8Br+dr+Ex1I+tj15oFvlTk7yLr+7C5+eHxSg4yZhhMtQ76Io04bWu ionCUBAR+zkjmZEFMTDbavcSVx6PFX0UsEwtSjgIkrA5tZfEWHWjvdCGsLaCJU5Ciwup tv7Q== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532kH5/KSOoLuUIZujjnkU3YeA0ydlOPivcnKCL83lGspS4jmAmg rhzYFJiRusONfXIKXsh46aHFVnGk32ZSPrgmOiPnxhxDbCeOv7Q1NLM= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwZ0UM/QylitSObAeIwRF7mjvssGZquKRdssTMN5RjtqjUjaKFocSXiALuvHemrmFYqTRIUlN3HSITLdbmYYvo= X-Received: by 2002:ab0:43e3:: with SMTP id l90mr3968900ual.6.1642151579620; Fri, 14 Jan 2022 01:12:59 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <3ddffa10278b5814123a5bcd2fd3a531def3ecdc.1641978175.git.dyroneteng@gmail.com> <220113.86sftsw1ut.gmgdl@evledraar.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <220113.86sftsw1ut.gmgdl@evledraar.gmail.com> From: Teng Long Date: Fri, 14 Jan 2022 17:12:48 +0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v10 7/9] ls-tree.c: introduce struct "show_tree_data" To: =?UTF-8?B?w4Z2YXIgQXJuZmrDtnLDsCBCamFybWFzb24=?= Cc: Johannes Schindelin , =?UTF-8?B?xJBvw6BuIFRy4bqnbiBDw7RuZyBEYW5o?= , Git Mailing List , Junio C Hamano , Jeff King , tenglong.tl@alibaba-inc.com, =?UTF-8?Q?Martin_=C3=85gren?= Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Jan 13, 2022 at 3:07 PM =C3=86var Arnfj=C3=B6r=C3=B0 Bjarmason wrote: > > "show_tree_data" is a struct that packages the necessary fields for > > "show_tree()". This commit is a pre-prepared commit for supporting > > "--format" option and it does not affect any existing functionality. > > Is the only reason this is split off from 9/9 because you're injecting a > 8/9 commit for the coccinelle rule change, and wanted to find some > logical cut-off between the two? I hope "show_tree()" and "the show_tree_format()" to share this structure, so I made this a pre-prepared and non-functional commit. After that, in the 9/9, the structure can be used directly and focus on the functionality changes. If we merge this commit with 9/9, 9/9 will contain a= part of the changes that let "show_tree()" use the new structure, which has noth= ing to do with "show_tree_format()" actually, because we designed them to go through different execution logic. So, personally, I prefer not to mix them together. So, the commit of "show_tree_data()" originally was not for "coccinelle". The only thing that is certain is that coccinelle also should go before 9/9 I think. With regard to 8/9 and 7/9, I think the current order is OK becaus= e they're not related. > > For both this & 9/9 this seems to mostly/substantially be code I wrote > and submitted as part of > https://lore.kernel.org/git/RFC-patch-6.7-eac299f06ff-20211217T131635Z-av= arab@gmail.com; > > The convention we use in such cases is to retain the "Author" header and > just add your own Signed-off-by to patches you're modifying/splitting > up. Oops. Sorry for that, I misunderstood it before and I'll be fixed in the next path. Thanks.