From: Kjetil Barvik <barvik@broadpark.no>
To: git@vger.kernel.org
Cc: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>,
Pete Harlan <pgit@pcharlan.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Kjetil Barvik <barvik@broadpark.no>
Subject: [PATCH/RFC v7 0/5] git checkout: optimise away lots of lstat() calls
Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 13:29:03 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1231849748-8244-1-git-send-email-barvik@broadpark.no> (raw)
Changes since version 6:
a) The patch-split was not correct for patch 3/3. In v6 it could look
like the lines:
- char path[PATH_MAX];
+ char path[PATH_MAX + 1];
was a random bugfix. In this version for patch 3/5 we also change
"&& last_slash < PATH_MAX" into "&& last_slash <= PATH_MAX" (and
similar for the else-if part). This could also make the intro-
duction of the 'FL_FULLPATH' flag more readable for this patch.
b) Cleanup and added 3 comments to 'greatest_match_lstat_cache()'
c) Introduction of the 'invalidate_lstat_cache()' function. How does
the interface look? good? bad? Does the function do what people
expect it to do?
d) Reintroduction of the 'clear_lstat_cache()' function.
Junio, I hope it is possible to use patches 1/5, 2/5 and 3/5 from this
version instead of 1/3, 2/3 and 3/3 from version 6, for the possible
future in origin/pu? See also a) above. Thanks in advance!
In general, are we allowed to redesign the patch-series while the
patches is inside origin/pu?
Kjetil Barvik (5):
lstat_cache(): more cache effective symlink/directory detection
lstat_cache(): introduce has_symlink_or_noent_leading_path() function
lstat_cache(): introduce has_dirs_only_path() function
lstat_cache(): introduce invalidate_lstat_cache() function
lstat_cache(): introduce clear_lstat_cache() function
cache.h | 4 +
entry.c | 34 +++-----
symlinks.c | 249 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------
unpack-trees.c | 4 +-
4 files changed, 222 insertions(+), 69 deletions(-)
next reply other threads:[~2009-01-13 12:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-01-13 12:29 Kjetil Barvik [this message]
2009-01-13 12:29 ` [PATCH/RFC v7 1/5] lstat_cache(): more cache effective symlink/directory detection Kjetil Barvik
2009-01-13 12:29 ` [PATCH/RFC v7 2/5] lstat_cache(): introduce has_symlink_or_noent_leading_path() function Kjetil Barvik
2009-01-13 12:29 ` [PATCH/RFC v7 3/5] lstat_cache(): introduce has_dirs_only_path() function Kjetil Barvik
2009-01-13 12:29 ` [PATCH/RFC v7 4/5] lstat_cache(): introduce invalidate_lstat_cache() function Kjetil Barvik
2009-01-13 12:29 ` [PATCH/RFC v7 5/5] lstat_cache(): introduce clear_lstat_cache() function Kjetil Barvik
2009-01-13 20:17 ` [PATCH/RFC v7 0/5] git checkout: optimise away lots of lstat() calls 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=1231849748-8244-1-git-send-email-barvik@broadpark.no \
--to=barvik@broadpark.no \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=pgit@pcharlan.com \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).