From: Elijah Newren Date: Sat, 08 Nov 2025 17:11:45 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH v7 0/3] replay: make atomic ref updates the default Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <0545bc77-8d69-4cf5-8d1c-ba59035eb556@gmail.com> On Sat, Nov 8, 2025 at 5:22 AM Siddharth Asthana wrote: > >> -: ---------- > 3: b7ebe1f534 replay: add replay.refAction config option > > There was a third patch in v6, but it doesn't show up in your > > range-diff? Did you specify the range incorrectly by chance when you > > generated this? > > > The range-diff shows all three patches (1:1, 2:2, 3:3), but the third > one appears as a new addition (-: → 3:) because it underwent significant > restructuring between v6 and v7. The config-related changes were moved > around between commits, making git see it as essentially new rather than > modified. No, the range diff does not show all three patches for v6, it only shows all three patches for v7. If you had all three patches shown for both versions, and the third had undergone significant restructuring, then you would expect to see two lines such as: 3: 6b2a44c72c < -: ----------- replay: add replay.refAction config option -: ----------- > 3: b7ebe1f534 replay: add replay.refAction config option The first line (missing from your range-diff) would correspond to the third patch from v6 being treated as deleted, and the second (present in your range-diff) would represent the third patch from v7 being considered an addition. You can verify the first line is missing from your range-diff by searching for "3:" in https://lore.kernel.org/git/20251105191650.89975-1-siddharthasthana31@gmail.com/ -- you only get one hit instead of the expected two -- which suggests you either didn't pass the correct range to range-diff or snipped part of the output when pasting to your email. In this case it doesn't matter much, because even if the 3rd patch from v6 was there we'd need to go an look at the individual patch due to the restructuring, but it was just a little odd so I pointed it out.