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=-4.2 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS 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 F0A181F5AE for ; Mon, 7 Jun 2021 22:50:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230251AbhFGWwS (ORCPT ); Mon, 7 Jun 2021 18:52:18 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com ([64.147.108.71]:56062 "EHLO pb-smtp2.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S230183AbhFGWwS (ORCPT ); Mon, 7 Jun 2021 18:52:18 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp2.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6CA74C1AFA; Mon, 7 Jun 2021 18:50:26 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:message-id:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; s=sasl; bh=NTg4GgjkabdXsMEFSpZRWnKo9 d8U/YtXkRhJDjGq4OI=; b=YBP91hVzhbfuYCblNUbNe7Hs2bWw1hjTub7RNf1KI OQl7LnrAiRsRMUfEYWzgucSRCYyfS4pJk7Q+A6tMGMd0w9hsdOQBhAAUoebtWz1e b+2faMI2VtAIryVjoFv7NbvU11a96cjrHmxUObCegJuYKRVjbOfVyUUUe2DfK7ue Ig= Received: from pb-smtp2.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 65E95C1AF9; Mon, 7 Jun 2021 18:50:26 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [104.196.172.107]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp2.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id ED768C1AF7; Mon, 7 Jun 2021 18:50:25 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: =?utf-8?B?w4Z2YXIgQXJuZmrDtnLDsA==?= Bjarmason Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Derrick Stolee , Elijah Newren Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] test-tool: split up "read-cache" tool References: Date: Tue, 08 Jun 2021 07:50:25 +0900 Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 X-Pobox-Relay-ID: BFD4E1CE-C7E2-11EB-9F05-FD8818BA3BAF-77302942!pb-smtp2.pobox.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org =C3=86var Arnfj=C3=B6r=C3=B0 Bjarmason writes: > When the sparse index topic was being discussed I suggested that the > t/helper/read-cache.c tool was getting to the point of doing too many > things and should be split up. > > Since that series has landed on master here's that suggestion again in > the form of patches on top of master. The 4/4 patch is a "while I was > at it" addition of an extra perf test for index refreshing. > > 1. https://lore.kernel.org/git/20210317132814.30175-6-avarab@gmail.com/ > > =C3=86var Arnfj=C3=B6r=C3=B0 Bjarmason (4): > test-tool: split up test-tool read-cache > test-tools: migrate read-cache-perf to parse_options() > test-tools: migrate read-cache-again to parse_options() > read-cache perf: add a perf test for refresh_index() Is the contrast between tool and tools deliberate? > Makefile | 2 ++ > t/helper/test-read-cache-again.c | 47 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > t/helper/test-read-cache-perf.c | 47 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > t/helper/test-read-cache.c | 56 +++++++++++++------------------- > t/helper/test-tool.c | 2 ++ > t/helper/test-tool.h | 2 ++ > t/perf/p0002-read-cache.sh | 7 +++- > t/t7519-status-fsmonitor.sh | 2 +- > 8 files changed, 130 insertions(+), 35 deletions(-) > create mode 100644 t/helper/test-read-cache-again.c > create mode 100644 t/helper/test-read-cache-perf.c