All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
To: Rene Scharfe <rene.scharfe@lsrfire.ath.cx>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>,
	git@vger.kernel.org,
	Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/3] Fold get_merge_bases_clean() into get_merge_bases()
Date: Sun, 02 Jul 2006 11:28:00 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <7vmzbr50b3.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <44A8051D.6040605@lsrfire.ath.cx> (Rene Scharfe's message of "Sun, 02 Jul 2006 19:40:45 +0200")

Rene Scharfe <rene.scharfe@lsrfire.ath.cx> writes:

>> I suspect the only way to fix that is to make "get_merge_bases()" not use 
>> UNINTERESTING at all, but instead just explicitly use something like
>
> No and yes.  Patch 1 in the 3+1 series changes the flags used in
> commit.c to not conflict with the ones in revision.h[*].  So we have two
> different UNINTERESTINGs, and get_merge_bases() doesn't mess up the
> show/no-show markings.

Gaah.  commit.c defines its own UNINTERESTING and you rely on
not including revision.h which is ... gasp ... #$@#$!!!

Could we do something like this, pretty please?

---
diff --git a/commit.c b/commit.c
index 94c1d0e..a608faf 100644
--- a/commit.c
+++ b/commit.c
@@ -851,14 +851,14 @@ void sort_in_topological_order_fn(struct
 /* bits #0..7 in revision.h */
 #define PARENT1		(1u<< 8)
 #define PARENT2		(1u<< 9)
-#define UNINTERESTING	(1u<<10)
+#define STALE		(1u<<10)
 
 static struct commit *interesting(struct commit_list *list)
 {
 	while (list) {
 		struct commit *commit = list->item;
 		list = list->next;
-		if (commit->object.flags & UNINTERESTING)
+		if (commit->object.flags & STALE)
 			continue;
 		return commit;
 	}
@@ -920,17 +920,17 @@ static struct commit *interesting(struct
  *
  * Next, we pop B and something very interesting happens.  It has flags==3
  * so it is also placed on the result list, and its parents are marked
- * uninteresting, retroactively, and placed back on the list:
+ * stale, retroactively, and placed back on the list:
  *
  *    list=C(7), result=C(7) B(3)
  *
  * Now, list does not have any interesting commit.  So we find the newest
- * commit from the result list that is not marked uninteresting.  Which is
+ * commit from the result list that is not marked stale.  Which is
  * commit B.
  *
  *
  * Another pathological example how this thing used to fail to mark an
- * ancestor of a merge base as UNINTERESTING before we introduced the
+ * ancestor of a merge base as STALE before we introduced the
  * postprocessing phase (mark_reachable_commits).
  *
  *		  2
@@ -960,8 +960,8 @@ static struct commit *interesting(struct
  *	 C7			2 3 7 1 3 2 1 2
  *
  * At this point, unfortunately, everybody in the list is
- * uninteresting, so we fail to complete the following two
- * steps to fully marking uninteresting commits.
+ * stale, so we fail to complete the following two
+ * steps to fully marking stale commits.
  *
  *	 D7			2 3 7 7 3 2 1 2
  *	 E7			2 3 7 7 7 2 1 2
@@ -981,10 +981,10 @@ static void mark_reachable_commits(struc
 	 */
 	for (tmp = result; tmp; tmp = tmp->next) {
 		struct commit *c = tmp->item;
-		/* Reinject uninteresting ones to list,
+		/* Reinject stale ones to list,
 		 * so we can scan their parents.
 		 */
-		if (c->object.flags & UNINTERESTING)
+		if (c->object.flags & STALE)
 			commit_list_insert(c, &list);
 	}
 	while (list) {
@@ -995,8 +995,8 @@ static void mark_reachable_commits(struc
 		list = list->next;
 		free(tmp);
 
-		/* Anything taken out of the list is uninteresting, so
-		 * mark all its parents uninteresting.  We do not
+		/* Anything taken out of the list is stale, so
+		 * mark all its parents stale.  We do not
 		 * parse new ones (we already parsed all the relevant
 		 * ones).
 		 */
@@ -1004,8 +1004,8 @@ static void mark_reachable_commits(struc
 		while (parents) {
 			struct commit *p = parents->item;
 			parents = parents->next;
-			if (!(p->object.flags & UNINTERESTING)) {
-				p->object.flags |= UNINTERESTING;
+			if (!(p->object.flags & STALE)) {
+				p->object.flags |= STALE;
 				commit_list_insert(p, &list);
 			}
 		}
@@ -1034,7 +1034,7 @@ struct commit_list *get_merge_bases(stru
 		struct commit *commit = list->item;
 		struct commit_list *parents;
 		int flags = commit->object.flags
-			& (PARENT1 | PARENT2 | UNINTERESTING);
+			& (PARENT1 | PARENT2 | STALE);
 
 		tmp = list;
 		list = list->next;
@@ -1042,8 +1042,8 @@ struct commit_list *get_merge_bases(stru
 		if (flags == (PARENT1 | PARENT2)) {
 			insert_by_date(commit, &result);
 
-			/* Mark parents of a found merge uninteresting */
-			flags |= UNINTERESTING;
+			/* Mark parents of a found merge stale */
+			flags |= STALE;
 		}
 		parents = commit->parents;
 		while (parents) {
@@ -1067,7 +1067,7 @@ struct commit_list *get_merge_bases(stru
 	for (tmp = result, list = NULL; tmp; ) {
 		struct commit *commit = tmp->item;
 		struct commit_list *next = tmp->next;
-		if (commit->object.flags & UNINTERESTING) {
+		if (commit->object.flags & STALE) {
 			if (list != NULL)
 				list->next = next;
 			free(tmp);
@@ -1075,15 +1075,15 @@ struct commit_list *get_merge_bases(stru
 			if (list == NULL)
 				result = tmp;
 			list = tmp;
-			commit->object.flags |= UNINTERESTING;
+			commit->object.flags |= STALE;
 		}
 
 		tmp = next;
 	}
 
 	if (cleanup) {
-		clear_commit_marks(rev1, PARENT1 | PARENT2 | UNINTERESTING);
-		clear_commit_marks(rev2, PARENT1 | PARENT2 | UNINTERESTING);
+		clear_commit_marks(rev1, PARENT1 | PARENT2 | STALE);
+		clear_commit_marks(rev2, PARENT1 | PARENT2 | STALE);
 	}
 
 	return result;

  reply	other threads:[~2006-07-02 18:28 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 49+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2006-07-01  2:44 A note on merging conflicts Linus Torvalds
2006-07-01  3:08 ` Junio C Hamano
2006-07-01  3:54   ` Linus Torvalds
2006-07-01  3:59     ` Linus Torvalds
2006-07-01 15:09     ` Rene Scharfe
2006-07-01 15:23       ` Johannes Schindelin
2006-07-01 16:25       ` Linus Torvalds
2006-07-01 18:13         ` Rene Scharfe
2006-07-01 18:01       ` J. Bruce Fields
2006-07-01 18:20         ` Linus Torvalds
2006-07-01 22:24           ` Daniel Barkalow
2006-07-01 22:57             ` Linus Torvalds
2006-07-01 23:25               ` Daniel Barkalow
2006-07-01 23:45                 ` Daniel Barkalow
2006-07-02 11:31                   ` Rene Scharfe
2006-07-02 21:42                     ` Daniel Barkalow
2006-07-02  0:08                 ` Linus Torvalds
2006-07-01 18:22         ` Jakub Narebski
2006-07-01 18:52           ` Linus Torvalds
2006-07-01 18:37       ` Junio C Hamano
2006-07-01 19:29         ` Rene Scharfe
2006-07-01 19:56           ` Junio C Hamano
2006-07-01 23:01             ` Johannes Schindelin
2006-07-01 20:04           ` Linus Torvalds
2006-07-01 20:07             ` Junio C Hamano
2006-07-01 20:14               ` Junio C Hamano
2006-07-01 23:29                 ` [PATCH 1/3] Add get_merge_bases_clean() Rene Scharfe
2006-07-01 23:43                   ` Johannes Schindelin
2006-07-01 23:29                 ` [PATCH 2/3] Add '...' operator for revisions Rene Scharfe
2006-07-01 23:29                 ` [PATCH 3/3] Make clear_commit_marks() clean harder Rene Scharfe
2006-07-03  9:32                   ` Junio C Hamano
2006-07-03 13:56                     ` Johannes Schindelin
2006-07-03 17:05                       ` Linus Torvalds
2006-07-03 21:08                         ` Johannes Schindelin
2006-07-03 19:47                       ` Junio C Hamano
2006-07-03 21:12                         ` Johannes Schindelin
2006-07-03 22:55                           ` Linus Torvalds
2006-07-04  7:53                             ` Johannes Schindelin
2006-07-04  8:20                               ` Junio C Hamano
2006-07-02  9:49                 ` [PATCH 4/3] Fold get_merge_bases_clean() into get_merge_bases() Rene Scharfe
2006-07-02  9:56                   ` Johannes Schindelin
2006-07-02 16:43                   ` Linus Torvalds
2006-07-02 17:40                     ` Rene Scharfe
2006-07-02 18:28                       ` Junio C Hamano [this message]
2006-07-02 20:59                         ` Rene Scharfe
2006-07-02 21:15                           ` Rene Scharfe
2006-07-02 21:17                           ` Linus Torvalds
2006-07-02 20:44                       ` Linus Torvalds
2006-07-07  8:26 ` A note on merging conflicts Junio C Hamano

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=7vmzbr50b3.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net \
    --to=junkio@cox.net \
    --cc=Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de \
    --cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=rene.scharfe@lsrfire.ath.cx \
    --cc=torvalds@osdl.org \
    /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.