From: Michael Montalbo Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2026 17:31:53 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/3] t/lib-httpd: make http-429 first-request check atomic Message-ID: In-Reply-To: On Mon, Aug 31, 2026 at 7:51 AM Junio C Hamano wrote: > > I too find it disturbing it that the messages from this author tends > to contain material that triggers "it may not be wrong, but is it > relevant?" reactions. More does not mean better. > Thank you for this feedback. I agree with it and will avoid relying on AI as I have to create and edit prose for documentation and cover letters. > The above made me curious enough to ask a near-by Gemini to distill > it down to quarter of the original length without losing essense of > the original. > > http-429.sh marks that a 429 response was served by creating a > state file with "test -f" and "touch". This check-and-set > sequence is not atomic and can race under concurrent Apache > requests, causing multiple requests to claim first-arrival > status. > > Replace the check and "touch" with an atomic "mkdir", which > fails if the directory already exists. In "permanent" mode, > skip the "mkdir" entirely so no state marker is ever created. > > Omit a regression test, as this concurrency window cannot be > forced deterministically without artificial synchronization > points. > > This seems readable enough to me, but may still need some manual > clean-up, but this experiment told me that "A lot of AI-fluff" is > not something users cannot avoid without some extra work. > I agree, even though I have spent a lot of time trying to "copy-edit" what is generated, the end result does tend to be verbose and include unnecessary detail. Compared to what I start with based on my initial idea and generated rough draft, a lot has been edited away. However, I do think I have regretfully avoided doing some of that extra work. Apologies for having you all read unnecessary AI-fluff, I will write prose for documentation and similar from scratch.