From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.1 (2015-04-28) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.7 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.1 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2EB9C1F453 for ; Fri, 19 Oct 2018 03:19:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726478AbeJSLXd (ORCPT ); Fri, 19 Oct 2018 07:23:33 -0400 Received: from mail-wr1-f67.google.com ([209.85.221.67]:36210 "EHLO mail-wr1-f67.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726245AbeJSLXc (ORCPT ); Fri, 19 Oct 2018 07:23:32 -0400 Received: by mail-wr1-f67.google.com with SMTP id y16so35823968wrw.3 for ; Thu, 18 Oct 2018 20:19:25 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=sender:from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id :user-agent:mime-version; bh=7XlyrjaCeAHFRqyqobffK3Cj/MfU+p2vP2uvULGQjCI=; b=iUQFsyTK1gImdKukqkZXsiVzs8Nk2E2A689eRVXAfMDkq7DXyo3S2ty+Lm83XtM2+a /eJxtmYjczpxr6awui426Wib4HYTFnv2TBVc23JPbbeW8BUvYEcotsQ2Btr3p+1Latl+ 05Kc3GM0MmYifk6lhDL/jUoRV23exKA62sWFiM1Jirg2/TCShy7n6/eIieJJ6mg4pUFV 8uU7f2uEdCLA2sfotlGN9Pt7VUCeZPv6uk5P6oz5Gc4cfJm5vZ6DmS7a/gxbChN92VKT LVB729aRVmeab88BTn3vO7samhdcDBwNKn7HXH5d6++rwriIaENM/t4IMEezEy9hLmbm Kxyw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:from:to:cc:subject:references:date :in-reply-to:message-id:user-agent:mime-version; bh=7XlyrjaCeAHFRqyqobffK3Cj/MfU+p2vP2uvULGQjCI=; b=GFURMwxC8pr0sl//tPzeKCJsi91aF81u04CKnic9j6cdRj5ES7OeZHYJw3wKh6Gpkz mWZeQgBPkvAzWTROUsNB54yjN+6elnKW1Sy1NduvgTzkJWTHR4tAotXjVO1r1FLT1q9S m3Vw8hSvrB5i/hXsTIcLiYVhICE8oBtRAO/h0XBqszyg2PTJZ7ur/fihkb5wv0noq70e H56EfrTdelro5HGmRXkNhqOxUZ+JmJVI4tcVXAfC6e9OtvSA0uvI8iUfNDqsSdDpVb+s icyZSGFAmwtHjojUoMRqJ+HrQzu8uG0yd2s+Th+62UsZCjYOcB7rNBEyQdCqBtxSn2uY DHkw== X-Gm-Message-State: ABuFfogQ+8NeD/D3+kNjvaLfvgyBTRbpf2vUphL0Nr7TqjaCgCDWy4a7 2jrVe2+vudj8eS1zLYvsvhU= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACcGV62Go1kdBwpUeAbtvvHzRBAbUWVZXp+JmxjNTa0mGPTiV3vqh5buODyovDP6Azo2i6R+/g9tKw== X-Received: by 2002:adf:81b5:: with SMTP id 50-v6mr29400460wra.10.1539919164641; Thu, 18 Oct 2018 20:19:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (112.68.155.104.bc.googleusercontent.com. [104.155.68.112]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id z4-v6sm17954495wrt.13.2018.10.18.20.19.23 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Thu, 18 Oct 2018 20:19:23 -0700 (PDT) From: Junio C Hamano To: Jonathan Tan Cc: git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] Clear flags before each v2 request References: <20181016215850.47821-1-jonathantanmy@google.com> Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2018 12:19:23 +0900 In-Reply-To: (Jonathan Tan's message of "Thu, 18 Oct 2018 13:43:26 -0700") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Jonathan Tan writes: > Jonathan Tan (3): > upload-pack: make have_obj not global > upload-pack: make want_obj not global > upload-pack: clear flags before each v2 request It took a bit of time why 2/3 did not apply cleanly but it turns out this is based on a slightly older tip of 'master' (but still ahead of 'maint'), that lacks 829a3215 ("commit-graph: close_commit_graph before shallow walk", 2018-08-20). Applying and merging it to make it up-to-date with the tip of 'master' went smoothly once I figured it out. The first two clean-up patches are probably overdue and worth doing regardless of the bugfix. Nicely done. The first two steps use static objects local to a transport method to "preserve the existing behaviour", and because this codepath happens to want a clean slate every time it gets called, the third step manages to lose it, which is a nice progression. But it makes me wonder if it also hints that there may be a need to invent a state object that is passed around from the transport layer across requests, if we want to fulfill a request by calling multiple transport methods in the future. In any case, there is no immediate need to address this comment ;-). Will replace. Thanks.