Re: [PATCH v2 0/8] hash: introduce unsafe_hash_algo(), drop unsafe_ variants
- From
Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
- Date
- Jan 10, 2025, 10:41 UTC
- Message-ID
- <20250110104106.GB1014709@coredump.intra.peff.net>
- In-Reply-To
- <cover.1736363652.git.me@ttaylorr.com>
On Wed, Jan 08, 2025 at 02:14:29PM -0500, Taylor Blau wrote:
Show 6 quoted lines
> (This series is rebased on 'master', which is 14650065b7 > (RelNotes/2.48.0: fix typos etc., 2025-01-07) at the time of writing). > > The bulk of this series is unchanged since last time, but a new seventh > patch that further hardens the hashfile_checkpoint callers on top of > Patrick's recent series[1].
I think that new patch is a definite improvement, though I left some comments there.
The changes in patch 1 look fine to me (I still think a generic "test-tool hash" would make more sense, but I'm OK punting on that for now).
I didn't see any response to the review in round 1 about the pointer dangers in patch 3. What do you think of using a separate git_hash_algo_fns struct, with the one-time conversion I showed in the subthread of:
https://lore.kernel.org/git/20241121093731.GD602681@coredump.intra.peff.net/
?
-Peff