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=-2.8 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,T_DKIM_INVALID, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=no 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 EA4FD1F404 for ; Mon, 26 Feb 2018 23:09:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751804AbeBZXJi (ORCPT ); Mon, 26 Feb 2018 18:09:38 -0500 Received: from mail-wm0-f68.google.com ([74.125.82.68]:51333 "EHLO mail-wm0-f68.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751786AbeBZXJg (ORCPT ); Mon, 26 Feb 2018 18:09:36 -0500 Received: by mail-wm0-f68.google.com with SMTP id h21so20560015wmd.1 for ; Mon, 26 Feb 2018 15:09:35 -0800 (PST) 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=f+00ggHMMoThYQQTV8Wxu0S48kQpjBqmi9bUgMlqaCo=; b=b766hsjJnyvf7xfM3BCzxA5xDsIzinhHwfqiRGrhG+Bxz2WPVhhdzwss1k0cDG2es9 LAlP4osMFnNclEO9Fukpy8kkIqLWH8Zoecm+KFrBVaPXAfprE+B3XHeHxm+tOWuRhrCa X5JfDk5Yovjdu8xFJjd/3sqw1A3/pZmVfph0elH/LVxwy5C0FbXdY9pd672vNZFX4yNW +rVMQ3Z/47RBseHhQeZWcacIY0r28p4m8iR8ZQxOefTiRXli0MStvqefsVbkwD32SNqT QkQYsYY0cd5MbOJVNdUPVEO1IKOE4y4I9lZYkQ3+NIiQ3ZLhGpzpBvyy0J/6i7PqEvvj b8Rw== 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=f+00ggHMMoThYQQTV8Wxu0S48kQpjBqmi9bUgMlqaCo=; b=BStaKn5fvfP+vJmgaM96voA+hw8E6YHLhc8ducVNYn2LefrDxsZVaDjD8wQbw18/Ez J8pWuCV3qBlfLGsnAzat3a+LNL9GG5358GQpBS84uNvy3ZSCl7nG1mrlOLXV/7D4FY92 rSEVtJ2d8eX5fzZx6zJjIbd17pAlwMQbK0YPfjP/ARZD4zYJ1GnHFFznGnOoVXTcZ9lM bNspMJqAJagHwAZHnJzMwpl4iBaBbmYuHKQyZOcrmMZ4YfORwNr6Rad6mY6aHwlbKH9n uB2qI5lczERkh0JkP52OlaT4IHm8wG2d6FzOJY4c5H0Rc3Zmtd9Sb4/G1Q+/x3pqSQJl wHJA== X-Gm-Message-State: APf1xPBvsa4flxa8u+rt87Hkyb+6kCdmE0cmCNK0y6tAWN46dS6AAf26 VtIsCD783RSoLAYaHinPAB7n8iDf X-Google-Smtp-Source: AG47ELuXeFwOSC4JtqJcHHPj+UyokxmoRuxRM6RsCLa9bT7onADg7e/rTsJBrBXRtWcCvHoms7YDSg== X-Received: by 10.28.122.12 with SMTP id v12mr8893313wmc.66.1519686574735; Mon, 26 Feb 2018 15:09:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost (112.68.155.104.bc.googleusercontent.com. [104.155.68.112]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id q11sm8515118wrb.74.2018.02.26.15.09.32 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Mon, 26 Feb 2018 15:09:32 -0800 (PST) From: Junio C Hamano To: Duy Nguyen Cc: "brian m. carlson" , Git Mailing List , Brandon Williams , Stefan Beller , Eric Sunshine , Jonathan Tan Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] Revert "repository: pre-initialize hash algo pointer" References: <20180214180814.GA139458@google.com> <20180223095640.25876-1-pclouds@gmail.com> <20180223095640.25876-3-pclouds@gmail.com> <20180223222950.GK6619@genre.crustytoothpaste.net> Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2018 15:09:31 -0800 In-Reply-To: (Duy Nguyen's message of "Sat, 24 Feb 2018 10:44:30 +0700") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.2.50 (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 Duy Nguyen writes: > Yes that's the intention. But after writing cover letter for v2 and > sending it out, it looks to me that this thing must stay until all our > code is converted to using the_hash_algo (I don't know if there are > more to convert or it's finished already). So an alternative is we do > the opposite: default to GIT_HASH_SHA1, but when an env variable is > set, reset it back to NULL. This env variable will _always_ be set by > the test suite to help us catch problems. If we were to do the "do not blindly initialize and always initialize explicitly for debugging" (which I doubt is a good direction to go in), then what you outlined above certainly is a less evil way to do so than what the patch under discussion did, I would think.