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-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,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 C62431F4B4 for ; Fri, 29 Jan 2021 22:15:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S233512AbhA2WKu (ORCPT ); Fri, 29 Jan 2021 17:10:50 -0500 Received: from cloud.peff.net ([104.130.231.41]:40922 "EHLO cloud.peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S233380AbhA2WKt (ORCPT ); Fri, 29 Jan 2021 17:10:49 -0500 Received: (qmail 4267 invoked by uid 109); 29 Jan 2021 22:09:45 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO peff.net) (10.0.1.2) by cloud.peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with ESMTP; Fri, 29 Jan 2021 22:09:45 +0000 Authentication-Results: cloud.peff.net; auth=none Received: (qmail 9869 invoked by uid 111); 29 Jan 2021 22:10:08 -0000 Received: from coredump.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.2) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with (TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Fri, 29 Jan 2021 17:10:08 -0500 Authentication-Results: peff.net; auth=none Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2021 17:10:07 -0500 From: Jeff King To: Junio C Hamano Cc: Taylor Blau , git@vger.kernel.org, dstolee@microsoft.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/10] p5303: measure time to repack with keep Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Jan 29, 2021 at 12:38:08PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > Oops. Looks like I was the one who introduced that. Nobody seems to have > > complained, so I'm somewhat tempted to leave it. But it would not be too > > hard to replace with perl, I think. > > Yeah, but would it be worth it? I am actually OK to say that you > need GNU sed if you want to run perf. We already rely on GNU time > to run perf tests, no? True. This one is a little worse because it's subtle, and somebody might copy it unknowingly into the regular test suite. I am happy to leave it, or for you to pick up the patch I sent earlier (which I did verify produces identical output). -Peff