From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: [RFH] revision limiting sometimes ignored Date: Sun, 3 Feb 2008 02:18:33 -0500 Message-ID: <20080203071833.GA16273@coredump.intra.peff.net> References: <20080202122135.GA5783@code-monkey.de> <20080203030054.GA18654@coredump.intra.peff.net> <20080203043310.GA5984@coredump.intra.peff.net> <7vr6fuzgq1.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> <20080203071318.GA13849@coredump.intra.peff.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Linus Torvalds To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sun Feb 03 08:19:39 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1JLZ8c-0006zf-Rg for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Sun, 03 Feb 2008 08:19:39 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S936057AbYBCHSh (ORCPT ); Sun, 3 Feb 2008 02:18:37 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S935875AbYBCHSg (ORCPT ); Sun, 3 Feb 2008 02:18:36 -0500 Received: from 66-23-211-5.clients.speedfactory.net ([66.23.211.5]:3861 "EHLO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756747AbYBCHSf (ORCPT ); Sun, 3 Feb 2008 02:18:35 -0500 Received: (qmail 17702 invoked by uid 111); 3 Feb 2008 07:18:34 -0000 Received: from coredump.intra.peff.net (HELO coredump.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.2) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.32) with SMTP; Sun, 03 Feb 2008 02:18:34 -0500 Received: by coredump.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Sun, 03 Feb 2008 02:18:33 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20080203071318.GA13849@coredump.intra.peff.net> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Sun, Feb 03, 2008 at 02:13:18AM -0500, Jeff King wrote: > Ah. I think what is happening is something like this: > > - when we add 'four' as uninteresting, we mark its parents as > uninteresting in handle_commit > - we don't recursively follow all of its parents because we haven't > parsed them yet > - when we get to limit_list, we call mark_parents_uninteresting again. > But we have already marked four^ as uninteresting, and therefore we > do not recurse in marking > - we add the parents to the list, but they are not interesting, and > therefore we quit So the "fix" I posted before was to stop bailing on everybody_uninteresting; clearly it is possible that although those commits are uninteresting, we still have work to do on their ancestors. There is probably a performance impact since we will end up traversing the whole commit chain just to mark them all uninteresting. We could also always recurse in make_parents_uninteresting; I think this has the same performance problem, since we have to parse the parents for each commit. We could topologically order the commits going into limit_list (it just works most of the time because the date ordering is _mostly_ right). This guarantees that we deal with 'four' before 'one'. But topo sorting is expensive. -Peff