Re: [PATCH 11/25] pack-bitmap-write.c: add a missing stop_progress()

From

SZEDER Gábor <szeder.dev@gmail.com>

Date

Sep 17, 2021, 05:14 UTC

Message-ID

<20210917051448.GB2118053@szeder.dev>

In-Reply-To

<patch-11.25-7f5b71fe1be-20210623T155626Z-avarab@gmail.com>

On Wed, Jun 23, 2021 at 07:48:11PM +0200, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:

> Fix a bug that's been here since 7cc8f971085 (pack-objects: implement
> bitmap writing, 2013-12-21), we did not call stop_progress() if we
> reached the early exit in this function. This will matter in a
> subsequent commit where we BUG(...) out if this happens, and matters
> now e.g. because we don't have a corresponding "region_end" for the
> progress trace2 event.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
> ---
>  pack-bitmap-write.c | 1 +
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
> 
> diff --git a/pack-bitmap-write.c b/pack-bitmap-write.c
> index 88d9e696a54..6e110e41ea4 100644
> --- a/pack-bitmap-write.c
> +++ b/pack-bitmap-write.c
> @@ -550,6 +550,7 @@ void bitmap_writer_select_commits(struct commit **indexed_commits,
>  	if (indexed_commits_nr < 100) {
>  		for (i = 0; i < indexed_commits_nr; ++i)
>  			push_bitmapped_commit(indexed_commits[i]);
> +		stop_progress(&writer.progress);
>  		return;
>  	}

  ---  >8  ---

diff --git a/pack-bitmap-write.c b/pack-bitmap-write.c
index 88d9e696a5..f0b4044e2b 100644
--- a/pack-bitmap-write.c
+++ b/pack-bitmap-write.c
@@ -544,15 +544,15 @@ void bitmap_writer_select_commits(struct commit **indexed_commits,
 
 	QSORT(indexed_commits, indexed_commits_nr, date_compare);
 
-	if (writer.show_progress)
-		writer.progress = start_progress("Selecting bitmap commits", 0);
-
 	if (indexed_commits_nr < 100) {
 		for (i = 0; i < indexed_commits_nr; ++i)
 			push_bitmapped_commit(indexed_commits[i]);
 		return;
 	}
 
+	if (writer.show_progress)
+		writer.progress = start_progress("Selecting bitmap commits", 0);
+
 	for (;;) {
 		struct commit *chosen = NULL;
 
  ---  8<  ---

And I don't think it's worth adding display() calls to that loop,
because it has so few iterations and it does barely anything per
iteration.