Re: [GSoC][Draft Proposal v4] Refactoring in order to reduce Git's global state
- From
- Phillip Wood <phillip.wood123@gmail.com>
- Date
- Mar 1, 2026, 16:43 UTC
- Message-ID
- <eecd6531-a7b5-4f0e-8e4d-3807f47d1f9d@gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <0a944142-7c51-4143-af00-2a5798ea68af@gmail.com>
Hi Tian
On 27/02/2026 16:58, Tian Yuchen wrote:
Show 15 quoted lines
>
>
> 3. Unit testing becomes difficult because the environment must be
> artificially manipulated before calling functions.
>
> Take a look at this example from environment.c:
>
> 206 const char *get_commit_output_encoding(void)
> 207 {
> 208 return git_commit_encoding ? git_commit_encoding : "UTF-8";
> 209 }
>
> If Git is invoked as a C library by a multi-threaded server:
> - Thread A formats a commit for Repo A (using GBK);
> - Thread B concurrently formats a commit for Repo B (using UTF-8);The encoding config is really a user preference that lets the user compose commit messages in their preferred encoding while allowing git to store the message encoded as UTF-8. I'm struggling to see why two threads would be using different encodings as it implies that the user is using different encodings in different repositories.
Below you say
> Variables parsed at startup (e.g., editor_program) > must not be moved to lazily parsed structs to ensure that > invalid configurations can trigger early failures before > execution proceeds too far, which is also for the sake of user > experience.
i18n.commitEncoding is another such setting as it is currently eagerly parsed so I'm surprised to see it being converted to lazy parsing in https://lore.kernel.org/20260228190201.3684705-1-a3205153416@gmail.com
I'm afraid that the suggestion on the project webpage is not very helpful. Most config variables are unsuited to a conversion based on repository_settings, it would be better to look at the approach implemented in https://lore.kernel.org/48821a3848bef25c13038be8377ad73e7c17a924.1771258573.git.belkid98@gmail.com that is discussed in https://lore.kernel.org/xmqqwm1vk83a.fsf@gitster.g
Thanks
Phillip
Show 134 quoted lines
> Then they will race to read and overwrite the exact same global
> `git_commit_encoding` pointer, which is not what we expect. Therefore,
> we have to refactor these environment variables by moving them from
> global scope into a well-defined and encapsulated context.
>
>
> -- Approach
>
> The task at hand goes beyond simply repackaging the global variables
> into the struct repository structure. Based on my recent experience
> refactoring setup.c, I realized that libification requires careful
> management of variable lifecycles and api boundaries:
>
> [ Current ]
> Core functions --------reads-------> Global variables (via getenv)
> [Thread unsafe]
>
> [ Target ]
> Core functions ----passes context--> struct repository
> | owns
> v
> struct repo_settings
>
> other domain-specific structs
>
> Although the principle is simple, the scope of changes is extensive. The
> following insights can serve as a guiding principle for it:
>
> 1. Identify isolated environment variables currently residing in the
> global scope. Conduct a case-by-case analysis to map each variable
> to its most appropriate existing home based on their lifecycles:
>
> Variables that are only parsed when needed will be safely mapped
> to struct repo_settings.
>
> Variables parsed at startup (e.g., editor_program)
> must not be moved to lazily parsed structs to ensure that
> invalid configurations can trigger early failures before
> execution proceeds too far, which is also for the sake of user
> experience.
>
> 2. Instead of blindly passing struct repository *repo down into every
> single low-level library function, bubbling the dependency up is
> the true goal. External callers of the functions must be carefully
> audited to prevent regressions.
>
> 3. Safely remove the old global variables and macro definitions. Make
> full use of Git's existing GitLab/GitHub CI and utilize local
> Meson builds with AddressSanitizer enabled to ensure that the new
> lifecycle introduces zero memory leaks.
>
>
> Additionally, given the anticipated high volume of commits, we must
> ensure each patch is independent and atomic, preventing any user-
> untraceable or unexplainable bugs from occurring in the codebase at any
> state.
>
>
> AVAILABILITY
> ------------
> Fortunately, my summer vacation coincides with the GSoC work period.
> I will treat this project as my primary focus, dedicating a minimum of
> 35 hours per week. If needed, I can work a 9-to-5 schedule.
>
> I will have a significant head start to draft RFC patches before the
> official coding period even begins. Having this buffer period allows me
> to go through the rigorous code review process within the Git community
> with greater ease.
>
>
> TIMELINE & MILESTONES
> ---------------------
> Considering the differences between this project and other projects on
> the idea list, rather than hoarding massive changes, I will submit 3-
> to-5-patch series frequently to respect reviewers' time and maintain a
> steady velocity.
>
> Below is the tentative schedule I have prepared for myself:
>
> * Community Bonding (May 1 - May 25): Planning & RFC
> - May 1 - May 7: Wrap up university finals. Discuss and finalize the
> prioritized list of subsystems with my mentor.
> - May 8 - May 25: Categorize the targeted global variables and map out
> their intended destinations (e.g., repo_settings). Draft and submit
> the initial RFC patch series.
>
> * Phase 1 (May 26 - July 10): Foundation
> - Weeks 1-2: Plumb the context pointer ('struct repository *repo')
> through call chains for simple variables (e.g., boolean flags or integer
> configs).
> - Weeks 3-4: Audit and update external callers to use the new API.
> - Weeks 5-6: Submit the first major refactoring patch series. Address
> mailing list feedback and resolve merge conflicts. (Midterm
> Evaluation)
>
> * Phase 2 (July 11 - August 18): Complex Migration & Cleanup
> - Weeks 7-8: Refactor higher-complexity variables (e.g., path-related
> globals).
> - Weeks 9-10: Compile the codebase with AddressSanitizer and run the
> full test suite to execute strict memory leak checks.
> - Weeks 11-12: Remove unused global macro definitions and static
> variables. Update internal documentation and write the final GSoC report.
>
> (The above is for reference only. Personally, I always finish tasks
> faster than planned 😉)
>
>
> ~$ git checkout HEAD@{postGSoC}
> -------------------------------
> This past month since joining the Git community has been the most
> enjoyable month of my programming journey. To quote a close friend of
> mine (who is applying for the Neovim GSoC project):
>
> "Only fools chase trends; open source is the game for the brave."
>
> The words may be blunt, but the logic holds true. This statement surely
> resonates with me (and maybe many other GSoC contributors): our passion
> for code and open-source drives us forward.
>
> Even if I didn't make the cut, so what? ~$ git reset --hard...
> Just kidding. The Git codebase is far too interesting to abandon now.
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Changes since V4:
>
> - “Treating variables or functions differently based on their
> lifecycle” has been added to the Approach section.
>
> - Fixed a typo below the diagram.
>
> Regards,
>
> Yuchen
>