Re: [PATCH 4/4] fsmonitor: Delay updating state until after split index is merged
- From
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
- Date
- Oct 21, 2017, 02:06 UTC
- Message-ID
- <xmqq376dgsq4.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <7c6bfaef-d05a-4c06-5a53-4f7811c81aec@gmail.com>
Ben Peart <peartben@gmail.com> writes:
Show 8 quoted lines
>>> + } else {
>>> + trace_printf_key(&trace_fsmonitor, "fsmonitor not enabled");
>>> + }
>>> +
>
> I'd remove the trace statement above as it isn't always
> accurate. fsmonitor could be enabled but just hasn't written/read the
> extension yet.I agree; when it is not enabled, we shouldn't be paying the penalty, either. I wonder if tweak_*() function can return early upfront if we know fsmonitor is not enabled to make it even more obvious.
Show 8 quoted lines
>>> + if (ignore_fsmonitor) >>> + trace_printf_key(&trace_fsmonitor, "Ignoring fsmonitor for %s", ce->name); >> >> This is the code path I am fairly certain should not be penalized if >> tracing is disabled. > > Definitely agree with the need to remove this tracing as it will get > called a lot and we don't want to pay the perf penalty.
Yes.