# [PATCH] Don't do status in submodules if status.SubmoduleSummary unset 4 messages from 2010-05-20 to 2010-05-20. Participants: Alex Riesen, Jens Lehmann. Thread: https://gitlist.dev/t/23856 ## Alex Riesen, 2010-05-20 14:12 Subject: [PATCH] Don't do status in submodules if status.SubmoduleSummary unset Message-ID: URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/AANLkTil1QHA3G2VaITdm7DkDmN1IhZ_u2SWLrelyxkF2%40mail.gmail.com ``` Noticed-by: Andy Parkins Signed-off-by: Alex Riesen -- On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 15:28, Junio C Hamano wrote: > As to the not-working-configuration I don't remember the codepath well, so > sorry but no answer from me right now. Maybe because we do a (kind of) gentle status run on submodules whether the status.SubmoduleSummary set or not. Usually a background run of "git status" for every submodules goes unnoticed, just sometimes a submodule is a little too big. I tried this, but feels like a bit of overkill. diff --git a/wt-status.c b/wt-status.c index 8ca59a2..d5bcdf9 100644 --- a/wt-status.c +++ b/wt-status.c @@ -303,7 +303,10 @@ static void wt_status_collect_changes_worktree(struct wt_status *s) init_revisions(&rev, NULL); setup_revisions(0, NULL, &rev, NULL); rev.diffopt.output_format |= DIFF_FORMAT_CALLBACK; - DIFF_OPT_SET(&rev.diffopt, DIRTY_SUBMODULES); + if (s->submodule_summary) + DIFF_OPT_SET(&rev.diffopt, DIRTY_SUBMODULES); + else + DIFF_OPT_SET(&rev.diffopt, IGNORE_SUBMODULES); if (!s->show_untracked_files) DIFF_OPT_SET(&rev.diffopt, IGNORE_UNTRACKED_IN_SUBMODULES); rev.diffopt.format_callback = wt_status_collect_changed_cb; From 6b7a5e0ac560e1187d8ff359bad8c04927d0b599 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Alex Riesen Date: Thu, 20 May 2010 16:04:11 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] Don't do status in submodules if status.SubmoduleSummary unset Noticed-by: Andy Parkins Signed-off-by: Alex Riesen diff --git a/wt-status.c b/wt-status.c index 8ca59a2..d5bcdf9 100644 --- a/wt-status.c +++ b/wt-status.c @@ -303,7 +303,10 @@ static void wt_status_collect_changes_worktree(struct wt_status *s) init_revisions(&rev, NULL); setup_revisions(0, NULL, &rev, NULL); rev.diffopt.output_format |= DIFF_FORMAT_CALLBACK; - DIFF_OPT_SET(&rev.diffopt, DIRTY_SUBMODULES); + if (s->submodule_summary) + DIFF_OPT_SET(&rev.diffopt, DIRTY_SUBMODULES); + else + DIFF_OPT_SET(&rev.diffopt, IGNORE_SUBMODULES); if (!s->show_untracked_files) DIFF_OPT_SET(&rev.diffopt, IGNORE_UNTRACKED_IN_SUBMODULES); rev.diffopt.format_callback = wt_status_collect_changed_cb; ``` ## Jens Lehmann, 2010-05-20 17:45 Subject: Re: [PATCH] Don't do status in submodules if status.SubmoduleSummary unset Message-ID: <4BF57538.5040204@web.de> URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/4BF57538.5040204%40web.de In-Reply-To: ``` Am 20.05.2010 16:12, schrieb Alex Riesen: > Maybe because we do a (kind of) gentle status run on submodules > whether the status.SubmoduleSummary set or not. Yup, because checking a submodule for its dirtiness has to be done no matter if the summary output is also wanted. > Usually a background > run of "git status" for every submodules goes unnoticed, just > sometimes a submodule is a little too big. > > I tried this, but feels like a bit of overkill. This patch seems to disable submodule output completely for the default case (when status.SubmoduleSummary is false) and breaks 17 test cases. So no thumbs up from me ;-) > diff --git a/wt-status.c b/wt-status.c > index 8ca59a2..d5bcdf9 100644 > --- a/wt-status.c > +++ b/wt-status.c > @@ -303,7 +303,10 @@ static void > wt_status_collect_changes_worktree(struct wt_status *s) > init_revisions(&rev, NULL); > setup_revisions(0, NULL, &rev, NULL); > rev.diffopt.output_format |= DIFF_FORMAT_CALLBACK; > - DIFF_OPT_SET(&rev.diffopt, DIRTY_SUBMODULES); > + if (s->submodule_summary) > + DIFF_OPT_SET(&rev.diffopt, DIRTY_SUBMODULES); > + else > + DIFF_OPT_SET(&rev.diffopt, IGNORE_SUBMODULES); > if (!s->show_untracked_files) > DIFF_OPT_SET(&rev.diffopt, IGNORE_UNTRACKED_IN_SUBMODULES); > rev.diffopt.format_callback = wt_status_collect_changed_cb; ``` ## Alex Riesen, 2010-05-20 19:34 Subject: Re: [PATCH] Don't do status in submodules if status.SubmoduleSummary unset Message-ID: URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/AANLkTikQDEwA7Iih9hniYzLfSGnPvZ9PTDNtSKfJPa9d%40mail.gmail.com In-Reply-To: <4BF57538.5040204@web.de> ``` On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 19:45, Jens Lehmann wrote: > Am 20.05.2010 16:12, schrieb Alex Riesen: >> Maybe because we do a (kind of) gentle status run on submodules >> whether the status.SubmoduleSummary set or not. > > Yup, because checking a submodule for its dirtiness has to be done > no matter if the summary output is also wanted. Yeah. Why? >> Usually a background >> run of "git status" for every submodules goes unnoticed, just >> sometimes a submodule is a little too big. >> >> I tried this, but feels like a bit of overkill. > > This patch seems to disable submodule output completely for the default > case (when status.SubmoduleSummary is false) and breaks 17 test cases. That's why I said it feels like overkill ``` ## Jens Lehmann, 2010-05-20 20:14 Subject: Re: [PATCH] Don't do status in submodules if status.SubmoduleSummary unset Message-ID: <4BF59809.7080706@web.de> URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/4BF59809.7080706%40web.de In-Reply-To: ``` Am 20.05.2010 21:34, schrieb Alex Riesen: > On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 19:45, Jens Lehmann wrote: >> Am 20.05.2010 16:12, schrieb Alex Riesen: >>> Maybe because we do a (kind of) gentle status run on submodules >>> whether the status.SubmoduleSummary set or not. >> >> Yup, because checking a submodule for its dirtiness has to be done >> no matter if the summary output is also wanted. > > Yeah. Why? Because summary output only describes what commits happened in the submodule (that operation is rather cheap). The status run is done to tell what changes in the submodules work tree have occurred since the last commit there (and for that we have to scan the whole tree). >>> Usually a background >>> run of "git status" for every submodules goes unnoticed, just >>> sometimes a submodule is a little too big. >>> >>> I tried this, but feels like a bit of overkill. >> >> This patch seems to disable submodule output completely for the default >> case (when status.SubmoduleSummary is false) and breaks 17 test cases. > > That's why I said it feels like overkill I just wanted to confirm your feeling ;-) ```