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: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.0 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 370BF1F463 for ; Wed, 4 Dec 2019 19:47:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728159AbfLDTr3 (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Dec 2019 14:47:29 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp20.pobox.com ([173.228.157.52]:57512 "EHLO pb-smtp20.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727978AbfLDTr3 (ORCPT ); Wed, 4 Dec 2019 14:47:29 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp20.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 810A78ECC7; Wed, 4 Dec 2019 14:47:28 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) 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; s=sasl; bh=t12zv/PRGreozYt+waaMWMfRS7w=; b=M16UVy 14xLB3dNyr1BBTf3PMnuQe03UN6pq4kWO6Kw59UxH3/mSe9ksgPA3JzyJuCGDlYZ 4qRtqX1iAp3Elf1SlJRXlQy0LwW3jHMXdrRLM0jktjXsIg2uuvb48YFgffzl1VZh yRo7ReVTx9jFU48TNosUmMWqVKDKwZq00lMiY= 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; q=dns; s=sasl; b=k399EVY3a5uhFEuL5Dox1IKb8zgApfSl xyUWVh/yEkAzL8zi2ufHL3zaj1rJg+bsDdRt+eCgCuipkqPsADIZSw37hnYp64MT YUK3HSSczinZjExA4suPgGnkCD47YzaPH/Eb9lqbHv/zil/FsFRDsP7PwGK/Fk1C roT7tpQyVYI= Received: from pb-smtp20.sea.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7888F8ECC5; Wed, 4 Dec 2019 14:47:28 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [34.76.80.147]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8BFE98ECC4; Wed, 4 Dec 2019 14:47:25 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Derrick Stolee Cc: Mike Hommey , git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] revision: free topo_walk_info before creating a new one in init_topo_walk References: <20191122083704.29267-1-mh@glandium.org> <20191122083704.29267-2-mh@glandium.org> <46c47a21-d0e1-296f-5563-ae29597f995c@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2019 11:47:23 -0800 In-Reply-To: (Derrick Stolee's message of "Wed, 4 Dec 2019 13:55:20 -0500") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: E564DB5E-16CE-11EA-BE26-B0405B776F7B-77302942!pb-smtp20.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Derrick Stolee writes: > On 12/1/2019 11:22 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote: >> Derrick Stolee writes: >> >>> In general I like this change. I'm happy that this was split into a >>> method instead of crammed into the block of the "if" below. >>> >>>> + clear_author_date_slab(&info->author_date); >>> >>> The only issue I have is that the author_date slab should not be >>> cleared. That is used by more than the topo-walk AND the values for >>> author dates will not change between subsequent revision walks. Just >>> drop that line and we should be good to go! >> >> Hmph, isn't this merely a performance thing, or would a slab that >> was once cleared never repopulate upon its second use (i.e. >> affecting correctness)? > > Yes, this is only a performance thing. If you think it is safest to > clear it here, then it can stay. Let's keep what is already in 'next' ;-) and possibly follow-up with a separate patch to remove this line, justfying the change as performance improvement. Thanks.