Re: ab/config-based-hooks-N status (was Re: [PATCH v5 24/36] run-command: add stdin callback for parallelization)
- From
Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
- Date
- Oct 12, 2021, 12:59 UTC
- Message-ID
- <87lf2yjt3v.fsf@evledraar.gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <87a6jmiezr.fsf@evledraar.gmail.com>
On Wed, Oct 06 2021, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:
Show 40 quoted lines
> On Thu, Sep 02 2021, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:
>
> Emily, there's a...:
>
>> diff --git a/t/helper/test-run-command.c b/t/helper/test-run-command.c
>> index 7ae03dc7123..9348184d303 100644
>> --- a/t/helper/test-run-command.c
>> +++ b/t/helper/test-run-command.c
>> @@ -32,8 +32,13 @@ static int parallel_next(struct child_process *cp,
>> return 0;
>>
>> strvec_pushv(&cp->args, d->argv);
>> + cp->in = d->in;
>> + cp->no_stdin = d->no_stdin;
>> strbuf_addstr(err, "preloaded output of a child\n");
>> number_callbacks++;
>> +
>> + *task_cb = xmalloc(sizeof(int));
>> + *(int*)(*task_cb) = 2;
>> return 1;
>> }
>
> Probably trivial to solve failure here in t0061-run-command.sh if you
> compile with SANITIZE=leak. This failed in combination with my[1] (but
> for anyone reading along, this patch has been ejected from "seen" a
> while ago).
>
> More generally: The equivalent of 01-07/36 of this series is being
> merged into "next". As described in a plan to submit this topic
> incrementally I was hoping to do 08-20/36 next, i.e. up to "run-command:
> remove old run_hook_{le,ve}() hook API". See [2] for that plan.
>
> You've been inactive on-list recently, it would be nice to time this so
> that by the time it gets to 21-36/36 (which I was planning to split in
> two per [2]) that you'd have time to review/help with outstanding issues
> etc, for eventually re-submitting your "config based hooks" on top once
> this all lands.
>
> 1. https://lore.kernel.org/git/patch-02.10-9a8804e1d9a-20211006T094705Z-avarab@gmail.com/
> 2. https://lore.kernel.org/git/875yut8nns.fsf@evledraar.gmail.com/Since I had a reason to look at this again, this fixes it. I've squashed it into my "base" branch, but it won't be in the next batch I submit (I have the cut-off point before this commit):
diff --git a/t/helper/test-run-command.c b/t/helper/test-run-command.c index fa25bcbbc0d..e9b4214d163 100644 --- a/t/helper/test-run-command.c +++ b/t/helper/test-run-command.c @@ -61,11 +61,21 @@ static void test_consume_sideband(struct strbuf *output, void *cb) fclose(sideband); } +static int task_free(int result, + struct strbuf *err, + void *pp_cb, + void *pp_task_cb) +{ + free(pp_task_cb); + return 0; +} + static int task_finished(int result, struct strbuf *err, void *pp_cb, void *pp_task_cb) { + task_free(0, NULL, NULL, pp_task_cb); strbuf_addstr(err, "asking for a quick stop\n"); return 1; } @@ -438,7 +448,7 @@ int cmd__run_command(int argc, const char **argv) if (!strcmp(argv[1], "run-command-parallel")) exit(run_processes_parallel(jobs, parallel_next, - NULL, NULL, NULL, NULL, &proc)); + NULL, NULL, NULL, task_free, &proc)); if (!strcmp(argv[1], "run-command-abort")) exit(run_processes_parallel(jobs, parallel_next, @@ -452,12 +462,12 @@ int cmd__run_command(int argc, const char **argv) proc.in = -1; proc.no_stdin = 0; exit (run_processes_parallel(jobs, parallel_next, NULL, - test_stdin, NULL, NULL, &proc)); + test_stdin, NULL, task_free, &proc)); } if (!strcmp(argv[1], "run-command-sideband")) exit(run_processes_parallel(jobs, parallel_next, NULL, NULL, - test_consume_sideband, NULL, + test_consume_sideband, task_free, &proc)); fprintf(stderr, "check usage\n");