From: Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>
To: Anders Kaseorg <andersk@mit.edu>
Cc: "Junio C Hamano" <gitster@pobox.com>,
"Git List" <git@vger.kernel.org>,
"Johannes Schindelin" <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de>,
"Jeff King" <peff@peff.net>,
"Andreas Heiduk" <andreas.heiduk@mathema.de>,
"Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason" <avarab@gmail.com>,
"Jiang Xin" <worldhello.net@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 4/8] worktree: simplify find_shared_symref() memory ownership model
Date: Wed, 1 Dec 2021 18:10:21 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAPig+cSNP-RBmsWWfT690-shFUCZ3J0X+FBiNjCqg=AkoBMBqQ@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20211201221547.1796213-5-andersk@mit.edu>
On Wed, Dec 1, 2021 at 5:16 PM Anders Kaseorg <andersk@mit.edu> wrote:
> Storing the worktrees list in a static variable meant that
> find_shared_symref() had to rebuild the list on each call (which is
> inefficient when the call site is in a loop), and also that each call
> invalidated the pointer returned by the previous call (which is
> confusing).
>
> Instead, make it the caller’s responsibility to pass in the worktrees
> list and manage its lifetime.
>
> Signed-off-by: Anders Kaseorg <andersk@mit.edu>
> ---
> diff --git a/builtin/receive-pack.c b/builtin/receive-pack.c
> @@ -1486,12 +1486,17 @@ static const char *update(struct command *cmd, struct shallow_info *si)
> - const struct worktree *worktree = is_bare_repository() ? NULL : find_shared_symref("HEAD", name);
> + struct worktree **worktrees = get_worktrees();
> + const struct worktree *worktree =
> + is_bare_repository() ?
> + NULL :
> + find_shared_symref(worktrees, "HEAD", name);
As far as I can see, this code only cares whether find_shared_symref()
returned a result; it doesn't actually consult the returned worktree
at all, thus it semantically considers `worktree` as a boolean, not as
a `struct worktree`. I see in [7/8] that you do add an access to the
`worktree.is_bare` field, but that also is used purely in a boolean
fashion. If my understanding is correct, then it seems as if it would
be cleaner and make for a much less noisy patch if you did this
instead:
struct worktree **worktrees = get_worktrees();
int has_worktree = 0;
if (!is_bare_repository()) {
struct worktree *w = find_shared_symref(worktrees, ...);
has_worktree = !!w;
}
free_worktrees(worktrees);
...
if (has_worktree) {
...
}
and in patch [7/8] augment that to:
int is_worktree_bare = 0;
if (!is_bare_repository()) {
struct worktree *w = find_shared_symref(worktrees, ...);
if (w) {
has_worktree = 1;
is_worktree_bare = w->is_bare;
}
}
free_worktrees(worktrees);
which would then allow you to...
> if (!starts_with(name, "refs/") || check_refname_format(name + 5, 0)) {
> rp_error("refusing to create funny ref '%s' remotely", name);
> - return "funny refname";
> + ret = "funny refname";
> + goto out;
> }
... drop this change and all the other similar changes to this file
since `worktrees` gets cleaned up as soon as `has_worktree` and
`is_worktree_bare` have been determined, so there's no need to
introduce an `out` label just to clean up `worktrees` at the end of
the function.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-12-01 23:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-12-01 22:15 [PATCH v7 0/8] protect branches checked out in all worktrees Anders Kaseorg
2021-12-01 22:15 ` [PATCH v7 1/8] fetch: lowercase error messages Anders Kaseorg
2021-12-01 22:15 ` [PATCH v7 2/8] receive-pack: " Anders Kaseorg
2021-12-01 22:15 ` [PATCH v7 3/8] branch: " Anders Kaseorg
2021-12-01 22:15 ` [PATCH v7 4/8] worktree: simplify find_shared_symref() memory ownership model Anders Kaseorg
2021-12-01 23:10 ` Eric Sunshine [this message]
2021-12-01 23:47 ` Anders Kaseorg
2021-12-02 0:13 ` Eric Sunshine
2021-12-02 0:32 ` Eric Sunshine
2021-12-02 9:06 ` Anders Kaseorg
2021-12-02 21:00 ` Eric Sunshine
2021-12-01 22:15 ` [PATCH v7 5/8] fetch: protect branches checked out in all worktrees Anders Kaseorg
2021-12-02 2:51 ` Eric Sunshine
2021-12-02 8:37 ` Anders Kaseorg
2021-12-01 22:15 ` [PATCH v7 6/8] receive-pack: clean dead code from update_worktree() Anders Kaseorg
2021-12-01 22:15 ` [PATCH v7 7/8] receive-pack: protect current branch for bare repository worktree Anders Kaseorg
2021-12-01 22:15 ` [PATCH v7 8/8] branch: protect branches checked out in all worktrees Anders Kaseorg
2021-12-23 0:58 ` Jiang Xin
2022-01-12 6:31 ` Jiang Xin
2022-01-12 19:10 ` 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='CAPig+cSNP-RBmsWWfT690-shFUCZ3J0X+FBiNjCqg=AkoBMBqQ@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=sunshine@sunshineco.com \
--cc=Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de \
--cc=andersk@mit.edu \
--cc=andreas.heiduk@mathema.de \
--cc=avarab@gmail.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=peff@peff.net \
--cc=worldhello.net@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).