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=-11.5 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_MED, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL 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 0EC4F1F8C6 for ; Tue, 14 Sep 2021 17:41:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230171AbhINRnK (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Sep 2021 13:43:10 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:56396 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229526AbhINRnJ (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Sep 2021 13:43:09 -0400 Received: from mail-pf1-x42d.google.com (mail-pf1-x42d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::42d]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ABFDEC061574 for ; Tue, 14 Sep 2021 10:41:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pf1-x42d.google.com with SMTP id e16so13035524pfc.6 for ; Tue, 14 Sep 2021 10:41:51 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20210112; h=from:date:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=Xm4+09i8cGiOUgS2ME2VWBXQ035KPSj+U9p+IiK5SmA=; b=Au4ItRy61SvTbSP7KCo1DUfS6QBMotSDgiDuN8AFYaVAOjLhr+nbIkTvO9rYOIyeOZ u+ikzA6vW+WHtJ/QXO+4w/u4CyHFjLGp3GwHmkAKyH7EiRJ2I7b9k2+WjlIl4Qz7mcN4 hzgZ2kBLgGFbKWghErb9nihDSjyWxQvjmGD8FbakXkGHW4/FqVetx2kgLk2DcJVQn9Y2 ubWto8eNbkMYFZtuPMcAF3TPjRh3el+7hhsqcuAFwF2pxa4mB4o95xQ4llwVrZISD0BI D1YYHo2e8MSsbPrGk0n7rOlzblmVUEtZqXA3X4ZIvEB3tpOLF236BAb8woeV4c79ofHS 4AkQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:from:date:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=Xm4+09i8cGiOUgS2ME2VWBXQ035KPSj+U9p+IiK5SmA=; b=TXafwYZY6zNn0rdOiiZFKBZTme15gCDLALDFBmfwhCzHVNZnPu/2tUvhh8J73gOw1O EAyRtM1W0IW4K23e6VwXYeKz63JUeLvRR9s76hZH8KiVNnU0gfDUsXyrKupbGuYRVkys 74Yq6ymq4kSQVrGBtJMLlTLBuqEbZuQTXseLyjkNnDIL0Hry1WimpbFUNAQ7q9c9e06u cSXuS9PZYm1I4HLQuR46YbwrbVhf3RxGDdmVB7iL1Ud0YJCDAB0jGfgm4TB7l7uVFOXE 7R/a/k1nVYXtz0XdVKOsRsZ5UA+yge6JINxbkKarg9KCJeuQ4Q00U/VYhQxGyQY7llgq YnOA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5332vgrFRLiIIjUEov9JSRKWlhMWDC2XT0W69cDvJ7QwCFgADQt8 DJ7b63HoiBr545GTKYztbalZsQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzZUkBUvKKcQns1+1txxa89m6A71xF6/iep2MaJu6Qq0TRW7186MXcy1hFp8GMwmTgxE4H0Zg== X-Received: by 2002:a63:9d44:: with SMTP id i65mr16478673pgd.69.1631641310971; Tue, 14 Sep 2021 10:41:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from chooglen-macbookpro.roam.corp.google.com ([2620:15c:2c1:200:694a:16e2:67eb:bcc9]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id k127sm11363850pfd.1.2021.09.14.10.41.42 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 14 Sep 2021 10:41:44 -0700 (PDT) From: Glen Choo X-Google-Original-From: Glen Choo Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2021 10:41:41 -0700 To: Taylor Blau Cc: Glen Choo , git@vger.kernel.org, derrickstolee@github.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] gc: perform incremental repack when implictly enabled Message-ID: References: <20210913181221.42635-1-chooglen@google.com> <20210913181221.42635-4-chooglen@google.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Sep 13, 2021 at 03:37:26PM -0400, Taylor Blau wrote: > > builtin/gc.c has two ways of checking of multi-pack-index is enabled: > > - git_config_get_bool() in incremental_repack_auto_condition() > > - the_repository->settings.core_multi_pack_index in > > maintenance_task_incremental_repack() > > Is this hinting at why there are no new tests added here? If so, it may > need to be explained more clearly, since I was a tad confused after > reading it. Looks like I'll need to be clearer; this wasn't my intention at all. I was hoping to describe the current state of affairs and to show that there are two different approaches. Thus, this patch is an attempt to 'standardize' the two approaches. > But if not, this patch message deserves an extra sentence or > two saying why tests aren't necessary. > > Or if none of that is the case, and tests *are* necessary, then they > should be added ;). I initially did not include tests because it *seemed* to me that there were no tests for this. But on a second pass, it looks like that assumption was completely wrong (the tests are in t7900-maintenance.sh). So, tests are necessary, and so I will add them :)