From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.6 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI, RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 73BBE2042F for ; Wed, 16 Nov 2016 23:46:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933562AbcKPXq3 (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Nov 2016 18:46:29 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com ([64.147.108.71]:59932 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753478AbcKPXq2 (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Nov 2016 18:46:28 -0500 Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A89D650EE6; Wed, 16 Nov 2016 18:46:27 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=sasl; bh=2JhG5XnhKlPA N+ejdUt2z64+vnc=; b=I2+5TCJhj+Y5JxNF5QMda0sKK1ev70R2y+smYLTCnIMf O6zgoRZyFJVoRtGmq4VL+lHEDCYcdYkvooqJCfaBPDPP8C2TbeADdDWpEhaNcNsD k+as9+MZo0gfHtOOKh2UrKx7jv2MO7xh8iQquCBmtN8IJxRnqJ7nW89RC0C/ZKw= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; q=dns; s=sasl; b=d1rToi IEFNc7uTOGyKt5b2bOyLk1pMEl1g9H1e/QHzKGFHrTsg/uViEzDYhodCZ9mXCl2c a4teC32tt98AwIQhO1fYvP5aDuqWvBTzl+97aZ+7NZViLjhDqZpppBYPBwFICrDo OgrUG27jbekjbsuIMMCVDhwWML0U1ee7CQuFk= Received: from pb-smtp2.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9F2E850EE5; Wed, 16 Nov 2016 18:46:27 -0500 (EST) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [104.132.0.95]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0A1EA50EE4; Wed, 16 Nov 2016 18:46:26 -0500 (EST) From: Junio C Hamano To: Jakub =?utf-8?Q?Nar=C4=99bski?= Cc: Lars Schneider , Eric Wong , git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: RFC: Enable delayed responses to Git clean/smudge filter requests References: <20161115010356.GA29602@starla> <5BC69AC1-5499-4F73-816A-D8786106D796@gmail.com> <17709AFF-3C2D-4EC0-97DC-BD750F514D0B@gmail.com> <5eb682e8-13cb-67f2-a8a9-ec1fa1d139c6@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2016 15:46:25 -0800 In-Reply-To: <5eb682e8-13cb-67f2-a8a9-ec1fa1d139c6@gmail.com> ("Jakub =?utf-8?Q?Nar=C4=99bski=22's?= message of "Wed, 16 Nov 2016 23:41:57 +0100") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 X-Pobox-Relay-ID: E3CFF20A-AC56-11E6-9003-3AB77A1B28F4-77302942!pb-smtp2.pobox.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Jakub Nar=C4=99bski writes: >> I intend to implement this feature only for the new long running filte= r >> process protocol. OK with you? > > If I remember and understand it correctly, current version of long > running process protocol processes files sequentially, one by one: > git sends file to filter wholly, and receives response wholly. > > In the single-file filter case, git calls filter process as async > task, in a separate thread, so that one thread feeds the filter, > and main thread (I think?) reads from it, to avoid deadlocks. > > Couldn't something like this be done for long running filter process, > via protocol extension? My reading of the message you are responding to is that Lars means doing so by "implement this feature". Instead of returning the filtered bytes, a new protocol lets his filter to say "No result yet for you to process, ask me later".