From: Patrick Steinhardt Date: Mon, 03 Nov 2025 14:00:35 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] maintenance: add 'is-needed' subcommand Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <20251031-562-add-sub-command-to-check-if-maintenance-is-needed-v1-5-a03d53e28d0e@gmail.com> On Fri, Oct 31, 2025 at 03:22:25PM +0100, Karthik Nayak wrote: > diff --git a/Documentation/git-maintenance.adoc b/Documentation/git-maintenance.adoc > index 540b5cf68b..edcc88f4d0 100644 > --- a/Documentation/git-maintenance.adoc > +++ b/Documentation/git-maintenance.adoc > @@ -84,6 +85,11 @@ The `unregister` subcommand will report an error if the current repository > is not already registered. Use the `--force` option to return success even > when the current repository is not registered. > > +is-needed:: > + Check whether maintenance needs to be run without actually running it. > + Exits with a 0 status code if maintenance needs to be run, 1 otherwise. > + Can be used along with `--task`. Ideally should be used with '--auto'. Okay. I assume when `--task` is not given we'll check all tasks specified by the configured strategy? Might make sense to document if so. > diff --git a/builtin/gc.c b/builtin/gc.c > index 72177305ff..4d20487ed6 100644 > --- a/builtin/gc.c > +++ b/builtin/gc.c > @@ -3253,7 +3253,60 @@ static int maintenance_stop(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix, > return update_background_schedule(NULL, 0); > } > > -static const char * const builtin_maintenance_usage[] = { > +static const char *const builtin_maintenance_is_needed_usage[] = { > + "git maintenance is-needed [--task=] [--schedule]", > + NULL > +}; > + > +static int maintenance_is_needed(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix, > + struct repository *repo UNUSED) > +{ > + struct maintenance_run_opts opts = MAINTENANCE_RUN_OPTS_INIT; > + struct string_list selected_tasks = STRING_LIST_INIT_DUP; > + struct gc_config cfg = GC_CONFIG_INIT; > + struct option options[] = { > + OPT_BOOL(0, "auto", &opts.auto_flag, > + N_("run tasks based on the state of the repository")), > + OPT_CALLBACK_F(0, "task", &selected_tasks, N_("task"), > + N_("check a specific task"), > + PARSE_OPT_NONEG, task_option_parse), > + OPT_END() > + }; > + bool is_needed = false; > + > + argc = parse_options(argc, argv, prefix, options, > + builtin_maintenance_is_needed_usage, > + PARSE_OPT_STOP_AT_NON_OPTION); > + > + gc_config(&cfg); > + initialize_task_config(&opts, &selected_tasks); > + > + if (argc) > + usage_with_options(builtin_maintenance_is_needed_usage, options); Shouldn't this check be directly after the call to `parse_options()`? > + if (opts.auto_flag) { > + for (size_t i = 0; i < opts.tasks_nr; i++) { > + if (tasks[opts.tasks[i]].auto_condition && > + tasks[opts.tasks[i]].auto_condition(&cfg)) { > + is_needed = true; > + break; > + } > + } Okay, we need to guard against the auto-condition not existing indeed. This is only due to the "prefetch" task though, all the others do have the callback. > + } else { > + /* When not using --auto, we should always require maintenance. */ > + is_needed = true; > + } I guess for now this is good enough, but it's not quite true. Some tasks won't require maintenance even without `--auto`, like for example when the reftable stack only has a single table. Patrick