threads / patch / 6874

patchrev-list --max-age, --max-count: support --boundary

Subject: [PATCH] rev-list --max-age, --max-count: support --boundary

## tl;dr

3 messages between Feb 19, 2007 and Feb 20, 2007. Diffs are folded; open one to read it.

replies: 2people: 2as markdown or json

Johannes Schindelin· Feb 19, 2007, 02:14 UTC · lore

Now, when saying --max-age=<timestamp>, or --max-count=<n>, together with --boundary, rev-list prints the boundary commits, i.e. the commits which are _just_ not shown without --boundary, i.e. their children are, but they aren't.

Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de>
---

	Of course, this is meant to speed up an otherwise expensive
	operation in git-bundle.

	However, this touches a very sensitive point in core git:
	the revision walking machinery. It passes all tests, but
	some eyeballing is much appreciated.

	Ah, and somebody better at writing short concise descriptions
	then me should look into documenting "edge" objects and
	"boundary" commits to the glossary (possibly after thinking
	if "edge" and "boundary" do mean the same after all).

	'nough for one night.

 revision.c |   24 ++++++++++++++++++++----
 1 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

Show changes to revision.c +20 −4

diff --git a/revision.c b/revision.c
index 5b1794b..87aea9c 100644
--- a/revision.c
+++ b/revision.c
@@ -1233,9 +1233,15 @@ static struct commit *get_revision_1(struct rev_info *revs)
 		 */
 		if (!revs->limited) {
 			if (revs->max_age != -1 &&
-			    (commit->date < revs->max_age))
-				continue;
-			add_parents_to_list(revs, commit, &revs->commits);
+			    (commit->date < revs->max_age)) {
+				if (revs->boundary)
+					commit->object.flags |=
+						BOUNDARY_SHOW | BOUNDARY;
+				else
+					continue;
+			} else
+				add_parents_to_list(revs, commit,
+						&revs->commits);
 		}
 		if (commit->object.flags & SHOWN)
 			continue;
@@ -1336,7 +1342,17 @@ struct commit *get_revision(struct rev_info *revs)
 	case -1:
 		break;
 	case 0:
-		return NULL;
+		if (revs->boundary) {
+			struct commit_list *list = revs->commits;
+			while (list) {
+				list->item->object.flags |=
+					BOUNDARY_SHOW | BOUNDARY;
+				list = list->next;
+			}
+			revs->max_count = -1;
+			revs->limited = 1;
+		} else
+			return NULL;
 	default:
 		revs->max_count--;
 	}

Junio C Hamano· Feb 19, 2007, 23:40 UTC · re: Johannes Schindelin · lore

Re: [PATCH] rev-list --max-age, --max-count: support --boundary

Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> writes:

Show 14 quoted lines

> Now, when saying --max-age=<timestamp>, or --max-count=<n>, together
> with --boundary, rev-list prints the boundary commits, i.e. the
> commits which are _just_ not shown without --boundary, i.e. their
> children are, but they aren't.
>
> Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de>
> ---
>
> 	Of course, this is meant to speed up an otherwise expensive
> 	operation in git-bundle.
>
> 	However, this touches a very sensitive point in core git:
> 	the revision walking machinery. It passes all tests, but
> 	some eyeballing is much appreciated.

I think this looks fine.

Initially I thought setting BOUNDARY_SHOW unconditionally would be wrong (the "limited" case takes pains to avoid showing redundant boundary commits), and that was exactly why I said it would be a bit more involved change, but I do not think of a topology that needs redundancy removal outside of "limited" case.

Show 16 quoted lines

> @@ -1336,7 +1342,17 @@ struct commit *get_revision(struct rev_info *revs)
>  	case -1:
>  		break;
>  	case 0:
> -		return NULL;
> +		if (revs->boundary) {
> +			struct commit_list *list = revs->commits;
> +			while (list) {
> +				list->item->object.flags |=
> +					BOUNDARY_SHOW | BOUNDARY;
> +				list = list->next;
> +			}
> +			revs->max_count = -1;
> +			revs->limited = 1;
> +		} else
> +			return NULL;

The resetting of max_count and limited probably needs some commenting.

Johannes Schindelin· Feb 20, 2007, 00:27 UTC · re: Junio C Hamano · lore

Re: [PATCH] rev-list --max-age, --max-count: support --boundary

Hi,

On Mon, 19 Feb 2007, Junio C Hamano wrote:

Show 21 quoted lines

> Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> writes:
> 
> > @@ -1336,7 +1342,17 @@ struct commit *get_revision(struct rev_info *revs)
> >  	case -1:
> >  		break;
> >  	case 0:
> > -		return NULL;
> > +		if (revs->boundary) {
> > +			struct commit_list *list = revs->commits;
> > +			while (list) {
> > +				list->item->object.flags |=
> > +					BOUNDARY_SHOW | BOUNDARY;
> > +				list = list->next;
> > +			}
> > +			revs->max_count = -1;
> > +			revs->limited = 1;
> > +		} else
> > +			return NULL;
> 
> The resetting of max_count and limited probably needs some
> commenting.

Right. Could you --amend with this, if you find it sufficient?

---

 revision.c |    1 +
 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)

Show changes to revision.c +1 −0

diff --git a/revision.c b/revision.c
index 87aea9c..be57191 100644
--- a/revision.c
+++ b/revision.c
@@ -1349,6 +1349,7 @@ struct commit *get_revision(struct rev_info *revs)
 					BOUNDARY_SHOW | BOUNDARY;
 				list = list->next;
 			}
+			/* all remaining commits are boundary commits */
 			revs->max_count = -1;
 			revs->limited = 1;
 		} else