[PATCH v5 04/22] split-index: add {add,remove}_split_index() functions

From: Christian Couder <christian.couder@gmail.com>
Date: Mar 6, 2017, 09:41 UTC
Message-ID: <20170306094203.28250-5-chriscool@tuxfamily.org>
In-Reply-To: <20170306094203.28250-1-chriscool@tuxfamily.org>

Also use the functions in cmd_update_index() in builtin/update-index.c.

These functions will be used in a following commit to tweak our use of the split-index feature depending on the setting of a configuration variable.

Signed-off-by: Christian Couder <chriscool@tuxfamily.org>
---
 builtin/update-index.c | 18 ++++++------------
 split-index.c          | 22 ++++++++++++++++++++++
 split-index.h          |  2 ++
 3 files changed, 30 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)

diff --git a/builtin/update-index.c b/builtin/update-index.c
index d530e89368..24fdadfa4b 100644
--- a/builtin/update-index.c
+++ b/builtin/update-index.c
@@ -1099,18 +1099,12 @@ int cmd_update_index(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix)
 	}
 
 	if (split_index > 0) {
-		init_split_index(&the_index);
-		the_index.cache_changed |= SPLIT_INDEX_ORDERED;
-	} else if (!split_index && the_index.split_index) {
-		/*
-		 * can't discard_split_index(&the_index); because that
-		 * will destroy split_index->base->cache[], which may
-		 * be shared with the_index.cache[]. So yeah we're
-		 * leaking a bit here.
-		 */
-		the_index.split_index = NULL;
-		the_index.cache_changed |= SOMETHING_CHANGED;
-	}
+		if (the_index.split_index)
+			the_index.cache_changed |= SPLIT_INDEX_ORDERED;
+		else
+			add_split_index(&the_index);
+	} else if (!split_index)
+		remove_split_index(&the_index);
 
 	switch (untracked_cache) {
 	case UC_UNSPECIFIED:
diff --git a/split-index.c b/split-index.c
index 615f4cac05..f519e60f87 100644
--- a/split-index.c
+++ b/split-index.c
@@ -317,3 +317,25 @@ void replace_index_entry_in_base(struct index_state *istate,
 		istate->split_index->base->cache[new->index - 1] = new;
 	}
 }
+
+void add_split_index(struct index_state *istate)
+{
+	if (!istate->split_index) {
+		init_split_index(istate);
+		istate->cache_changed |= SPLIT_INDEX_ORDERED;
+	}
+}
+
+void remove_split_index(struct index_state *istate)
+{
+	if (istate->split_index) {
+		/*
+		 * can't discard_split_index(&the_index); because that
+		 * will destroy split_index->base->cache[], which may
+		 * be shared with the_index.cache[]. So yeah we're
+		 * leaking a bit here.
+		 */
+		istate->split_index = NULL;
+		istate->cache_changed |= SOMETHING_CHANGED;
+	}
+}
diff --git a/split-index.h b/split-index.h
index c1324f521a..df91c1bda8 100644
--- a/split-index.h
+++ b/split-index.h
@@ -31,5 +31,7 @@ void merge_base_index(struct index_state *istate);
 void prepare_to_write_split_index(struct index_state *istate);
 void finish_writing_split_index(struct index_state *istate);
 void discard_split_index(struct index_state *istate);
+void add_split_index(struct index_state *istate);
+void remove_split_index(struct index_state *istate);
 
 #endif

-- 
2.12.0.206.g74921e51d6.dirty