Re: [PATCH v7] describe: refresh the index when 'broken' flag is used

From: Karthik Nayak <karthik.188@gmail.com>
Date: Jun 30, 2024, 16:12 UTC
Message-ID: <CAOLa=ZS359bMtUd+ktvJgHsiG-0=VVdGWYA2mKCNjc_1BrzcvQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <xmqqfrsyv155.fsf@gitster.g>

Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> writes:

Show 29 quoted lines

> Abhijeet Sonar <abhijeet.nkt@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> I have a question:
>>
>> Why does --dirty code path also not call git-update-index and instead does
>>
>> 	setup_work_tree();
>> 	prepare_repo_settings(the_repository);
>> 	the_repository->settings.command_requires_full_index = 0;
>> 	repo_read_index(the_repository);
>> 	refresh_index(...);
>> 	fd = repo_hold_locked_index(...);
>> 	if (0 <= fd)
>> 		repo_update_index_if_able(the_repository, &index_lock);
>>
>> I assume they are equivalent?
>
> Now we are going back full circles ;-)?
>
> Your earliest attempt indeed copied the above to the code paths used
> to handle "--broken", but then Phillip corrected the course
>
>   https://lore.kernel.org/git/054c6ac1-4714-4600-afa5-7e9b6e9b0e72@gmail.com/
>
> to avoid triggering an in-process error and instead run an
> equivalent "update-index --refresh" via the run_command() interface,
> so that we can catch potential errors.  The code in the more recent
> rounds of your patch uses that, no?
>

This explains for why 'broken' must use a subprocess, but there is nothing stopping 'dirty' from also using a subprocess, right? It currently uses an in-process index refresh but it _could_ be a subprocess too.

Does it need to be a subprocess? I can't think of any reason to make it.