Re: [RFH] two and half potential fixlets to the in-core index handling
- From
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
- Date
- Aug 23, 2008, 19:14 UTC
- Message-ID
- <7v1w0fzgpc.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org>
- In-Reply-To
- <alpine.LFD.1.10.0808231104500.3363@nehalem.linux-foundation.org>
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> writes:
Show 10 quoted lines
> On Sat, 23 Aug 2008, Junio C Hamano wrote: >> >> A hacky solution I have in the attached patch is to waste an xmalloc(1) >> and store it there when o->result is created, and also make >> read_from_index() pay attention to the cache_nr and the cache_changed >> bit. I think it is the safest and minimum fix. > > Hmm. Wouldn't it be nicer to just add another bit to istate? We have the > space already, since we already have a bitfield there, with just one bit > used?
cache_changed can also become a single-bit field.
The oldest "the_index" users work from it in the BSS initialized all zero. We'd also need to mark it as initialized, wouldn't we?