From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/9] respect binary attribute in grep Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2012 06:07:19 -0500 Message-ID: <20120202110719.GA29870@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <20120201221437.GA19044@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20120201232109.GA2652@sigill.intra.peff.net> <7vhaza12ol.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> <20120202005209.GA6883@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20120202081747.GA10271@sigill.intra.peff.net> <87vcnp5wkg.fsf@thomas.inf.ethz.ch> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: Junio C Hamano , Thomas Rast , Conrad Irwin , git@vger.kernel.org, Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy , Dov Grobgeld To: Thomas Rast X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Feb 02 12:07:28 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RsuVj-00037g-PV for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Thu, 02 Feb 2012 12:07:28 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755651Ab2BBLHX (ORCPT ); Thu, 2 Feb 2012 06:07:23 -0500 Received: from 99-108-226-0.lightspeed.iplsin.sbcglobal.net ([99.108.226.0]:53275 "EHLO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753447Ab2BBLHW (ORCPT ); Thu, 2 Feb 2012 06:07:22 -0500 Received: (qmail 21002 invoked by uid 107); 2 Feb 2012 11:14:27 -0000 Received: from sigill.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.7) (smtp-auth username relayok, mechanism cram-md5) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with ESMTPA; Thu, 02 Feb 2012 06:14:27 -0500 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Thu, 02 Feb 2012 06:07:19 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87vcnp5wkg.fsf@thomas.inf.ethz.ch> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Thu, Feb 02, 2012 at 12:00:47PM +0100, Thomas Rast wrote: > My original plan was to make use_threads git-global, instead of > grep-global (and shift responsibility to the subsystems instead of their > users), but that's just me and the patches aren't ready yet. Yeah, having just dug into the threading code in grep a bit, I agree that would be a saner approach. The locking is all bolted-on, so you end up with these weird contracts between code, like the low-level grep code asking anybody who might be multi-threading it to initialize the mutexes to cover access to a totally different subsystem. I'd much rather each subsystem just take care of itself. -Peff