Re: [PATCH 5/8] builtin/pack-objects: simplify logic to find kept or nonlocal objects

From: Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im>
Date: Oct 30, 2025, 08:58 UTC
Message-ID: <aQMo0QJUPWqkbRNC@pks.im>
In-Reply-To: <aQKfnd2gWS2T9GaD@nand.local>

On Wed, Oct 29, 2025 at 07:13:33PM -0400, Taylor Blau wrote:

Show 29 quoted lines

> On Tue, Oct 28, 2025 at 12:08:35PM +0100, Patrick Steinhardt wrote:
> > @@ -4388,27 +4388,27 @@ static void add_unreachable_loose_objects(struct rev_info *revs)
> > -	while (p) {
> > -		if ((!p->pack_local || p->pack_keep ||
> > -				p->pack_keep_in_core) &&
> > -			find_pack_entry_one(oid, p)) {
> > +	repo_for_each_pack(the_repository, p) {
> > +		if ((!p->pack_local || p->pack_keep || p->pack_keep_in_core) &&
> > +		    find_pack_entry_one(oid, p)) {
> >  			last_found = p;
> >  			return 1;
> >  		}
> > -		if (p == last_found)
> > -			p = packfile_store_get_packs(packs);
> > -		else
> > -			p = p->next;
> > -		if (p == last_found)
> > -			p = p->next;
> > +
> > +		/*
> > +		 * We have already checked `last_found`, so there is no need to
> > +		 * re-check here.
> > +		 */
> > +		if (p == last_found && last_found != (void *)1)
> > +			continue;
> 
> Can 'p' ever be (void *)1 here? I would imagine not since this is coming
> from repo_for_each_pack(), so I think it would suffice to limit this
> conditional to just "if (p == last_found)".

Oh, you're right of course, will adapt.

Furthermore, do we even need the `(void *)1` thingy? I think it should be perfectly fine to instead use a `NULL` pointer here. A valid pack obviously cannot be a `NULL` pointer, so the sentinel feels kind of pointless to me.

> Otherwise looks good. I think you could make use of the kept_cache here
> at least for the local-but-kept packs, but what you wrote is definitely
> an improvement in readability.

Makes sense. I'll leave this out of this series though as a #leftoverbit for a future patch series :)

Thanks!

Patrick