Re: [PATCH] Fix maybe-uninitialized warnings found by gcc 9 -flto
- From
Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
- Date
- Sep 6, 2019, 01:24 UTC
- Message-ID
- <20190906012430.GA29104@sigill.intra.peff.net>
- In-Reply-To
- <6894a758-d4ee-92e8-1aab-fc44c9ddcdc3@gmx.net>
On Fri, Sep 06, 2019 at 01:10:46AM +0200, Stephan Beyer wrote:
> I took a quick glance at yours. I also noticed the issue you address in > [PATCH 2/6], but I was unsure if this is the way to go (I'm only > occasionally reading on this list). I would prefer your patch series, > with maybe one exception...
Yeah, we've been slowly removing these old "unsigned char *" references (see a7db4c193d98f for the latest round touching this same code -- I'm actually surprised I missed this one back then, as that's when packlist_find() got converted).
Show 9 quoted lines
> The thing is: I had *exactly* the same commit like your [PATCH 6/6]
> (except for the commit message and for the number), but I dropped it.
> Why? Because I had the feeling (no particular instance though) that the
> second locate_object_entry_hash() for each insertion *can* indeed take
> "too much" time. Also, I was wondering, if the "found = 1" case should
> be catched as a BUG("should not happen") or something.
>
> I don't care much, though. The performance impact should probably be
> checked carefully.I did measure it, like this:
# Do the traversal separately. This would make any difference in the # pack-objects hash code stand out _more_, plus it makes it cheaper to # run multiple trials. git rev-list --objects --all >input
# Make sure stderr is redirected to avoid progress, which again would # amplify any differences. git pack-objects --stdout --delta-base-offset <input >/dev/null 2>&1
Running on linux.git, I got:
[before]
Benchmark #1: git pack-objects --stdout --delta-base-offset <input >/dev/null 2>&1
Time (mean ± σ): 26.225 s ± 0.233 s [User: 24.089 s, System: 4.867 s]
Range (min … max): 25.915 s … 26.555 s 10 runs [after]
Benchmark #1: git pack-objects --stdout --delta-base-offset <input >/dev/null 2>&1
Time (mean ± σ): 26.129 s ± 0.170 s [User: 24.003 s, System: 4.958 s]
Range (min … max): 25.974 s … 26.570 s 10 runsSo actually faster after, though not statistically significant. ;)
The BUG() on "found==1" might be worth doing.
-Peff