Re: inotify to minimize stat() calls

From: Duy Nguyen <pclouds@gmail.com>
Date: Feb 11, 2013, 03:03 UTC
Message-ID: <CACsJy8Aw1GpKXGwjMdzjXBxAMrC-q6HDSyi2u6EoXCYDV8fJ4Q@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CALkWK0kLieAfPihX3j=BzD+ndo-g-2210Za2xN=HbHcRVwgMtA@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 11:45 PM, Ramkumar Ramachandra <artagnon@gmail.com> wrote:

Show 8 quoted lines

> So you're skipping the rest of refresh_cache_ent(), which contains our
> lstat() and returning immediately.  Instead of marking paths with the
> "assume unchanged" bit, as core.ignoreStat does, you're directly
> attacking the function that refreshes the index and bypassing the
> lstat() call.  How are they different?  read-cache.c:1030 checks
> ce->flags & CE_VALID (which is set in read-cache.c:88 if
> assume_unchanged) and bypasses the lstat() call anyway.  So why didn't
> you just set core.ignoreStat for your test?

It just did not occur to me that core.ignoreStat does the same.

Show 8 quoted lines

> Ah, read_directory(), from the .gitignore/ exclude angle.  Yes,
> read_directory() seems to be the main culprit there, from my reading
> of Documentation/technical/api-directory-listing.txt.
>
> So, what did you do?  You short-circuited the function into never
> executing read_directory_recursive(), so the opendir() and readdir()
> are gone.  I'm confused about what this means: will new directories
> fail to appear as "untracked" now?

No, read_directory returns the list of untracked/ignored files. Returning empty lists means no untracked nor ignored files.

-- 
Duy