Re: [PATCH] subtree: fix argument handling in check_parents
- From
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
- Date
- Dec 1, 2021, 23:04 UTC
- Message-ID
- <xmqq1r2wylik.fsf@gitster.g>
- In-Reply-To
- <pull.1086.git.1638324413653.gitgitgadget@gmail.com>
"James Limbouris via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@gmail.com> writes:
Show 18 quoted lines
> From: James Limbouris <james@digitalmatter.com> > > check_parents was taking all of its arguments as a single string, > and erroneously passing them to cache_miss as a single string. > cache_miss would then fail, and the spurious cache misses it produced > would hurt performance. > > For consistency, take multiple arguments in check_parents, > and pass all of them to cache_miss separately. > > Signed-off-by: James Limbouris <james@digitalmatter.com> > --- > subtree: fix argument handling in check_parents > > Hello git developers. Please consider this small patch that fixes a bug > introduced during a coding style cleanup of the subtree command. Changes > to the argument handling were causing check_parents to fail when more > than one parent was supplied, which led to a small loss of performance.
I do not do "git subtree", and this cannot really be a proper review that is more than "Looks OK from a cursory look", but anyway...
It seems that 315a84f9 (subtree: use commits before rejoins for splits, 2018-09-28) is what broke the logic, but it does not look like a coding style clean-up to me.
Show 14 quoted lines
> diff --git a/contrib/subtree/git-subtree.sh b/contrib/subtree/git-subtree.sh
> index 7f767b5c38f..56f24000c2c 100755
> --- a/contrib/subtree/git-subtree.sh
> +++ b/contrib/subtree/git-subtree.sh
> @@ -296,10 +296,9 @@ cache_miss () {
> done
> }
>
> -# Usage: check_parents PARENTS_EXPR
> +# Usage: check_parents [REVS...]
> check_parents () {
> - assert test $# = 1
> - missed=$(cache_miss "$1") || exit $?
> + missed=$(cache_miss $*) || exit $?We know at this point each of $1, $2, etc. have exactly one revision, and we want cache_miss function to take one revision per its parameter, so writing "$@" is much more preferrable over $* even though they do the same thing in practice in the context of this code, I think.
Show 14 quoted lines
> local indent=$(($indent + 1))
> for miss in $missed
> do
> @@ -753,7 +752,7 @@ process_split_commit () {
> fi
> createcount=$(($createcount + 1))
> debug "parents: $parents"
> - check_parents "$parents"
> + check_parents $parents
> newparents=$(cache_get $parents) || exit $?
> debug "newparents: $newparents"
>
>
> base-commit: e9d7761bb94f20acc98824275e317fa82436c25d