From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
To: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Cc: "René Scharfe" <l.s.r@web.de>, "Git List" <git@vger.kernel.org>,
"Jonathan Tan" <jonathantanmy@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] sha1_file: avoid comparison if no packed hash matches the first byte
Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2017 22:36:33 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <xmqqpoc58fq6.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170808225851.kgbyrlqrtlurzc73@sigill.intra.peff.net> (Jeff King's message of "Tue, 8 Aug 2017 18:58:51 -0400")
Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:
> On Tue, Aug 08, 2017 at 06:52:31PM -0400, Jeff King wrote:
>
>> > Interesting. I see that we still have the conditional code to call
>> > out to sha1-lookup.c::sha1_entry_pos(). Do we need a similar change
>> > over there, I wonder? Alternatively, as we have had the experimental
>> > sha1-lookup.c::sha1_entry_pos() long enough without anybody using it,
>> > perhaps we should write it off as a failed experiment and retire it?
>>
>> There is also sha1_pos(), which seems to have the same problem (and is
>> used in several places).
>
> Actually, I take it back. The problem happens when we enter the loop
> with no entries to look at. But both sha1_pos() and sha1_entry_pos()
> return early before hitting their do-while loops in that case.
Ah, I was not looking at that part of the code. Thanks.
I still wonder if we want to retire that conditional invocation of
sha1_entry_pos(), though.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-08-09 5:36 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-08-08 22:07 [PATCH] sha1_file: avoid comparison if no packed hash matches the first byte René Scharfe
2017-08-08 22:41 ` Jonathan Nieder
2017-08-08 22:43 ` Junio C Hamano
2017-08-08 22:52 ` Jeff King
2017-08-08 22:58 ` Jeff King
2017-08-09 5:36 ` Junio C Hamano [this message]
2017-08-09 9:20 ` Jeff King
2017-08-09 10:11 ` Jeff King
2017-08-09 10:14 ` [PATCH 1/2] sha1_file: drop experimental GIT_USE_LOOKUP search Jeff King
2017-08-09 18:12 ` Junio C Hamano
2017-08-09 21:09 ` Jeff King
2017-08-09 10:16 ` [PATCH 2/2] hashcmp: use memcmp instead of open-coded loop Jeff King
2017-08-09 14:55 ` René Scharfe
2017-08-09 15:06 ` Jeff King
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=xmqqpoc58fq6.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com \
--to=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=jonathantanmy@google.com \
--cc=l.s.r@web.de \
--cc=peff@peff.net \
/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.