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,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,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 1514D1F9FD for ; Thu, 4 Mar 2021 03:06:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S232102AbhCDDFB (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Mar 2021 22:05:01 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:56200 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S232206AbhCDDE7 (ORCPT ); Wed, 3 Mar 2021 22:04:59 -0500 Received: from mail-qt1-x82e.google.com (mail-qt1-x82e.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::82e]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AF4C4C061756 for ; Wed, 3 Mar 2021 19:04:13 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-qt1-x82e.google.com with SMTP id v3so19399637qtw.4 for ; Wed, 03 Mar 2021 19:04:13 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ttaylorr-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=Mw5Bex3Cz4DtclbLl8ijeilOG32MHn8tVfCbik+5ccU=; b=EKM/CedF8l+s0VzeOLEV7q4HX1hzqSdmX2bOZee8mYay7zwMpcKfwg8NUCC508sUCJ 65jyFN1nM4SaQbv/qW/OJUjVzZ1FOrA5vzmF/hWJZst6giM5XHRzMsgja+3a4AKN2PPV n8WMM/LGLjpQyAulFui3G4mLv3vx6cmYlKPI47R7QWqFUWsg/Vs6SvIBBSVSdzg1uA0d 5Jzhvd/KtzERPxjzNM7njYf7iBMzQooHlLrj+3jl+PsmQ930p7pcQsTV0cMtcMGqBNKD gbiWicqoQDQ7Mixbai3Jik9LQIvbKBfq6N4rUL+LC4uSKV68qRTVmmWGXIDqUH5PeNSa YdXg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=Mw5Bex3Cz4DtclbLl8ijeilOG32MHn8tVfCbik+5ccU=; b=MsL0jlfJNH3cA8UcVO3S60bwhFrOIof8jQKdfK+Z3wVK0izk57458gXtNMhMus9/bd b01vKVDYT0GHnMGXwv6v0EMWJZ1/ZHwb6B7863G1KqXs+SV8swXzJRDdjn0GZEuc3Qkc iLpOhnvSUyjoUg4HlQK1cf434cobT2MkgRJ4i4mDBl8lJufw8z8ZNit6jypWxH1sPbYU pFkNVHEWplvnphKizVBEn/f4o9mcXADCwJ+Wbfhs9vmyXFjYNGJwaAmHnlfHbNu9UFsJ sPUKslC/GaFYayqiw9/EYuBR6Adx+Q8O4lJkQ6YJYsbnh4bGAukp5re7h3PfpnSnL4Oq tdjA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533mXOO4yoNSW2ic0Fntq4YNXU7j24xbkcv5Z4fSWDKzvWAs3Lit /aLUQ0ZtlNtizktmPWUjgUrixA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzf8hLOckSZ//zujBFJhtTDqp+lMBgGZ+JdmVgeoITxA8gxrBdNjq3jY0LyZ0itVT+popTfAw== X-Received: by 2002:ac8:7b38:: with SMTP id l24mr2378248qtu.182.1614827052930; Wed, 03 Mar 2021 19:04:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost ([2605:9480:22e:ff10:661d:484a:c652:586b]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id e21sm340896qtw.63.2021.03.03.19.04.12 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 03 Mar 2021 19:04:12 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2021 22:04:10 -0500 From: Taylor Blau To: Jonathan Tan Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, peff@peff.net, dstolee@microsoft.com, avarab@gmail.com, gitster@pobox.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 08/15] midx: allow marking a pack as preferred Message-ID: References: <20210304020017.1802260-1-jonathantanmy@google.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20210304020017.1802260-1-jonathantanmy@google.com> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Mar 03, 2021 at 06:00:17PM -0800, Jonathan Tan wrote: > > I > > think ultimately you want something like this squashed in: > > > > --- >8 --- > > > > diff --git a/midx.c b/midx.c > > index d2c56c4bc6..46f55ff6cf 100644 > > --- a/midx.c > > +++ b/midx.c > > @@ -582,7 +582,7 @@ static struct pack_midx_entry *get_sorted_entries(struct multi_pack_index *m, > > struct pack_info *info, > > uint32_t nr_packs, > > uint32_t *nr_objects, > > - uint32_t preferred_pack) > > + int preferred_pack) > > Why this change? This was wrong in the original patch: ctx.preferred_pack is an integer, and is set to -1 when no preferred pack was specified. It's certainly unlikely that we'd have 2^31 packs, but silently converting a signed type to an unsigned one is misleading. > The rest makes sense. Thanks for taking a look. Taylor