From: David Turner <novalis@novalis.org>
Date: Sun, 19 Jun 2016 05:07:02 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH v12 11/20] index-helper: use watchman to avoid refreshing, index with lstat()
Message-ID: <57662876.3070209@novalis.org>
In-Reply-To: <CACsJy8DzyvFOHU_8xoWUcjej=Ws7_v475=Q2iZmwKhkzYaZ7sg@mail.gmail.com>

Duy Nguyen <pclouds@gmail.com> wrote:
 > On Fri, May 20, 2016 at 4:45 AM, David Turner 
<dturner@twopensource.com> wrote:
 > > diff --git a/read-cache.c b/read-cache.c
 > > index 1719f5a..8ec4be3 100644
 > > --- a/read-cache.c
 > >  +++ b/read-cache.c
 > > @@ -1235,7 +1235,7 @@ int refresh_index(struct index_state *istate, 
unsigned int flags,
 > >                 if (!new) {
 > >                         const char *fmt;
 > >
 > > -                       if (really && cache_errno == EINVAL) {
 > > +                       if (really || cache_errno == EINVAL) {
 > >                                 /* If we are doing --really-refresh 
that
 > >                                  * means the index is not valid 
anymore.
 > >                                  */
 >
 > This looks really odd. I don't see why we would need this. It seems
 > first appeared in your "do not apply" patch [1]. Maybe leftover?
 >
 > I found this while re-reading the series and I have not put much time
 > in studying this code yet. So I may be wrong. I'll post again if I
 > find that it's true after some more staring.

I don't remember the exact details here, but I think we needed this so
that we would ever refresh a file that watchman told us had been
modified.  We definitely were missing some invalidation if we didn't
have it.

P.S. Please CC novalis@novalis.org on these emails as I don't always
check the git mailing list.

P.P.S. Since I don't have the original message in my mailbox, I am 
trying something weird to send this message with a correct in-reply-to 
header. I something ends up screwed up, I apologize.

-- 
Duy