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=-3.8 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,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE 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 04D9C1F4BD for ; Thu, 3 Oct 2019 06:56:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727587AbfJCG4L (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Oct 2019 02:56:11 -0400 Received: from mail-ed1-f66.google.com ([209.85.208.66]:42853 "EHLO mail-ed1-f66.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725879AbfJCG4K (ORCPT ); Thu, 3 Oct 2019 02:56:10 -0400 Received: by mail-ed1-f66.google.com with SMTP id y91so1389578ede.9 for ; Wed, 02 Oct 2019 23:56:09 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=HNJlLmVqOoOyN4nSvgKg57l7hJyMsHEIFXkeABblEIY=; b=sp1RoArlttB/2DiOAYV6C6Inw0glCI8C/TPqSskQdUNFjiOR3Gy1/1pHmfPKhS9yUs eDGc90snVIdTfo6P0FKjD3hcwz3HhcWznrB4gRDdqnH4M7JU+GfE45HgrFRUKifORdij klRekSUZ3Aal13CkLnURs2th/73X0dJn4yJIOmN7/qJeuNaBY3UJod+WixbY3tRhbaYe jb9vIsCUG3oDx1LTNH+UeWpuKYKQtz8v3W7tG83NyhA5NgGqdUS0Cq1VMGDHgR10ZsOP jKekKCGJVnjdMO+7Oqec32di+xdZ09LK8Iz3OayPdL1c3MJKysmvujld1hrzd0mH2lf7 fWhg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=HNJlLmVqOoOyN4nSvgKg57l7hJyMsHEIFXkeABblEIY=; b=pPZ64E57tecnLQFSHs9dDgemKG2GHo2QdL9Acs16Txx+Ig1VFOPWgH+0qb4pbqxWK7 bpIvTmi+Zis7PnVI9bsiTQ4TKOVl8T4vCLRD8w3xOMxcoXVdyzfpoz0Z1Tr9DVOuw9eR tXLhK2gDavBRZhuj/4JOgKVuEPtojdl7FcGhwtafEm0766EZ8gj+viyNEAV8UpRcjqDv 3TFoPX7WBkh7C9EbaVx90hjn/ey4xmV46IJFY5FtfhBQcDO6+ZnvVP7n/SR1mgfSV36W 97gm9CyUtS74al1TE6N19o22WIXU8PIKd1IDIiu+at/6Nf22Un1xoxLwcjxFcgNRo6w3 A9fw== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAWj9nymg+wl+eObbJPmEv8UEjHSilZAFP3K7TqQW2t7fqbXwo/v gebUnwh3KwjlC3gngmZAM/PsHvTcZpxgaes9DqU= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzsSnd3710HLh8VAD4oP4ejTR7Gmha70KAjz5A2QUqIZM6VtVU2VrjchfK3iynx5fGRSuQX4iS1lbCGWSMC7/c= X-Received: by 2002:a50:9fe5:: with SMTP id c92mr7918855edf.280.1570085768977; Wed, 02 Oct 2019 23:56:08 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20190913130226.7449-1-chriscool@tuxfamily.org> <20190913130226.7449-11-chriscool@tuxfamily.org> <20190914020225.GB28422@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20191002155721.GD6116@sigill.intra.peff.net> In-Reply-To: From: Christian Couder Date: Thu, 3 Oct 2019 08:55:57 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 10/10] pack-objects: improve partial packfile reuse To: Junio C Hamano Cc: Jeff King , git , Christian Couder , Ramsay Jones Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Oct 3, 2019 at 4:06 AM Junio C Hamano wrote: > > Jeff King writes: > > > Hmm, I see the early parts of this graduated to 'next'. I'm not sure > > everything there is completely correct, though. E.g. I'm not sure of the > > reasoning in df75281e78 (ewah/bitmap: always allocate 2 more words, > > 2019-09-13). Yeah, when I prepared the series I wondered why we allocate 2 more words instead of just 1 more, but I forgot to ask that when sending it. > > I'm sorry for being so slow on giving it a more careful review. I was > > traveling for work, then playing catch-up, and am now going on vacation. > > So it might be a little while yet. > > Thanks for a status update. I do not mind moving this topic much > slower than other topics at all (if somebody is actively working on > it, I do not even mind reverting the merge and requeuing an updated > series, but I do not think that is the case here). I think the series requires at least documenting pack.allowPackReuse which is introduced in d35b73c5e9 (pack-objects: introduce pack.allowPackReuse, 2019-09-13). I was planning to send an additional patch to do that, but if you prefer I can add the documentation to the same commit that introduce the config variable and resend everything. > It would give me > much more confidence in the topic if we can collectively promise > ourselves that we'll give it a good review before we let it graduate > to 'master'. Yeah, a review from Peff could be especially insightful as the code comes from GitHub.