From: Duy Nguyen <pclouds@gmail.com>
To: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC 4/4] attr: avoid heavy work when we know the specified attr is not defined
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2014 07:50:18 +0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20141215005018.GA31006@lanh> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <xmqqsigojr0u.fsf@gitster.dls.corp.google.com>
On Tue, Dec 09, 2014 at 04:18:57PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy <pclouds@gmail.com> writes:
>
> > +static void collect_selected_attrs(const char *path, int num,
> > + struct git_attr_check *check)
> > +{
> > + struct attr_stack *stk;
> > + int i, pathlen, rem, dirlen;
> > + int basename_offset;
> > +
> > + pathlen = split_path(path, &dirlen, &basename_offset);
> > + prepare_attr_stack(path, dirlen);
> > + if (cannot_trust_maybe_real) {
> > + for (i = 0; i < git_attr_nr; i++)
> > + check_all_attr[i].value = ATTR__UNKNOWN;
>
> Judging from the fact that
>
> (1) the only caller calls this function in this fashion based on the
> setting of "cannot-trust" bit,
>
> (2) this and the other function the only caller calls share the
> same code in their beginning part, and
>
> (3) the body of the if() statement here duplicates the code from
> collect_all_attrs(),
>
> I smell that a much better split is possible.
>
> Why isn't this all inside a single function collect_all_attrs()?
> That single function may no longer be collect_ALL_attrs, so renaming
> it to collect_attrs() is fine, but then that function may have this
> if () to initialize all of them to ATTR__UNKNOWN or do the else part
> we see below, and when organized that way we do not need to have
> duplicated code (or split_path() helper function), no?
Something like this? Definitely looks better.
-- 8< --
diff --git a/attr.c b/attr.c
index b80e52b..0f828e3 100644
--- a/attr.c
+++ b/attr.c
@@ -33,9 +33,11 @@ struct git_attr {
unsigned h;
int attr_nr;
int maybe_macro;
+ int maybe_real;
char name[FLEX_ARRAY];
};
static int attr_nr;
+static int cannot_trust_maybe_real;
static struct git_attr_check *check_all_attr;
static struct git_attr *(git_attr_hash[HASHSIZE]);
@@ -97,6 +99,7 @@ static struct git_attr *git_attr_internal(const char *name, int len)
a->next = git_attr_hash[pos];
a->attr_nr = attr_nr++;
a->maybe_macro = 0;
+ a->maybe_real = 0;
git_attr_hash[pos] = a;
REALLOC_ARRAY(check_all_attr, attr_nr);
@@ -269,6 +272,10 @@ static struct match_attr *parse_attr_line(const char *line, const char *src,
/* Second pass to fill the attr_states */
for (cp = states, i = 0; *cp; i++) {
cp = parse_attr(src, lineno, cp, &(res->state[i]));
+ if (!is_macro)
+ res->state[i].attr->maybe_real = 1;
+ if (res->state[i].attr->maybe_macro)
+ cannot_trust_maybe_real = 1;
}
return res;
@@ -713,7 +720,9 @@ static int macroexpand_one(int nr, int rem)
* Collect all attributes for path into the array pointed to by
* check_all_attr.
*/
-static void collect_all_attrs(const char *path)
+static void collect_some_attrs(const char *path, int num,
+ struct git_attr_check *check)
+
{
struct attr_stack *stk;
int i, pathlen, rem, dirlen;
@@ -736,6 +745,19 @@ static void collect_all_attrs(const char *path)
prepare_attr_stack(path, dirlen);
for (i = 0; i < attr_nr; i++)
check_all_attr[i].value = ATTR__UNKNOWN;
+ if (num && !cannot_trust_maybe_real) {
+ rem = 0;
+ for (i = 0; i < num; i++) {
+ if (!check[i].attr->maybe_real) {
+ struct git_attr_check *c;
+ c = check_all_attr + check[i].attr->attr_nr;
+ c->value = ATTR__UNSET;
+ rem++;
+ }
+ }
+ if (rem == num)
+ return;
+ }
rem = attr_nr;
for (stk = attr_stack; 0 < rem && stk; stk = stk->prev)
@@ -746,7 +768,7 @@ int git_check_attr(const char *path, int num, struct git_attr_check *check)
{
int i;
- collect_all_attrs(path);
+ collect_some_attrs(path, num, check);
for (i = 0; i < num; i++) {
const char *value = check_all_attr[check[i].attr->attr_nr].value;
@@ -762,7 +784,7 @@ int git_all_attrs(const char *path, int *num, struct git_attr_check **check)
{
int i, count, j;
- collect_all_attrs(path);
+ collect_some_attrs(path, 0, NULL);
/* Count the number of attributes that are set. */
count = 0;
-- 8< --
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-12-15 0:50 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-12-09 13:53 [PATCH/RFC 0/4] some attr optimizations Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy
2014-12-09 13:53 ` [PATCH 1/4] attr.c: rename global var attr_nr to git_attr_nr Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy
2014-12-09 23:54 ` Junio C Hamano
2014-12-09 13:53 ` [PATCH 2/4] attr.c: split path processing code out of collect_all_attrs() Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy
2014-12-09 13:53 ` [PATCH/RFC 3/4] attr: do not attempt to expand when we know it's not a macro Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy
2014-12-09 23:27 ` Eric Sunshine
2014-12-09 23:56 ` Junio C Hamano
2014-12-09 13:53 ` [PATCH/RFC 4/4] attr: avoid heavy work when we know the specified attr is not defined Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy
2014-12-10 0:18 ` Junio C Hamano
2014-12-15 0:50 ` Duy Nguyen [this message]
2014-12-15 17:30 ` Junio C Hamano
2014-12-27 23:39 ` [PATCH v2 0/3] some attr optimizations Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy
2014-12-27 23:39 ` [PATCH v2 1/3] attr.c: rename arg name attr_nr to avoid shadowing the global one Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy
2014-12-27 23:39 ` [PATCH v2 2/3] attr: do not attempt to expand when we know it's not a macro Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy
2014-12-27 23:59 ` Eric Sunshine
2014-12-27 23:39 ` [PATCH v2 3/3] attr: avoid heavy work when we know the specified attr is not defined Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20141215005018.GA31006@lanh \
--to=pclouds@gmail.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.