From: John Keeping <john@keeping.me.uk>
To: Kevin Bracey <kevin@bracey.fi>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>,
Jeff King <peff@peff.net>, Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>,
Michael J Gruber <git@drmicha.warpmail.net>
Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH 0/2] merge-base: add --merge-child option
Date: Sun, 12 May 2013 17:58:29 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130512165829.GM2299@serenity.lan> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130512162823.GK2299@serenity.lan>
On Sun, May 12, 2013 at 05:28:24PM +0100, John Keeping wrote:
> However, this doesn't seem to make a difference to the time taken when I
> add in --cherry-mark (which is why I was partially correct in the
> parallel thread - it doesn't have the effect on cherry-mark that I want
> it to):
>
> $ time git rev-list --ancestry-path --left-right --count --cherry-mark \
> origin/master...git-gui/master
> 2056 5 0
>
> real 0m32.266s
> user 0m31.522s
> sys 0m0.749s
>
> $ time git rev-list --left-right --count --cherry-mark \
> origin/master...git-gui/master
> 31959 5 0
>
> real 0m32.140s
> user 0m31.337s
> sys 0m0.807s
>
> This seems to be caused by the code in revision.c::limit_list() which
> does the cherry detection then limits to left/right and only then
> applies the ancestry path. I haven't looked further than that, but is
> there any reason not to apply the ancestry path restriction before
> looking for patch-identical commits?
With the patch below, the --ancestry-path version drops to under 2
seconds.
I'm not sure if this is a good idea though. It helps me say "I know
nothing that isn't on the ancestry path can be patch-identical, so don't
bother checking if it is" but it regresses users who want the full
cherry-pick check while only limiting the output.
Perhaps we need --cherry-no-uninteresting to apply the first 3 hunks of
the patch at runtime :-S
-- >8 --
diff --git a/revision.c b/revision.c
index de3b058..d721d83 100644
--- a/revision.c
+++ b/revision.c
@@ -837,7 +837,7 @@ static void cherry_pick_list(struct commit_list *list, struct rev_info *revs)
for (p = list; p; p = p->next) {
struct commit *commit = p->item;
unsigned flags = commit->object.flags;
- if (flags & BOUNDARY)
+ if (flags & (BOUNDARY | UNINTERESTING))
;
else if (flags & SYMMETRIC_LEFT)
left_count++;
@@ -858,7 +858,7 @@ static void cherry_pick_list(struct commit_list *list, struct rev_info *revs)
struct commit *commit = p->item;
unsigned flags = commit->object.flags;
- if (flags & BOUNDARY)
+ if (flags & (BOUNDARY | UNINTERESTING))
continue;
/*
* If we have fewer left, left_first is set and we omit
@@ -879,7 +879,7 @@ static void cherry_pick_list(struct commit_list *list, struct rev_info *revs)
struct patch_id *id;
unsigned flags = commit->object.flags;
- if (flags & BOUNDARY)
+ if (flags & (BOUNDARY | UNINTERESTING))
continue;
/*
* If we have fewer left, left_first is set and we omit
@@ -1103,17 +1103,18 @@ static int limit_list(struct rev_info *revs)
show(revs, newlist);
show_early_output = NULL;
}
- if (revs->cherry_pick || revs->cherry_mark)
- cherry_pick_list(newlist, revs);
-
- if (revs->left_only || revs->right_only)
- limit_left_right(newlist, revs);
if (bottom) {
limit_to_ancestry(bottom, newlist);
free_commit_list(bottom);
}
+ if (revs->cherry_pick || revs->cherry_mark)
+ cherry_pick_list(newlist, revs);
+
+ if (revs->left_only || revs->right_only)
+ limit_left_right(newlist, revs);
+
/*
* Check if any commits have become TREESAME by some of their parents
* becoming UNINTERESTING.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-05-12 16:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 22+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-05-11 12:23 [RFC/PATCH 0/2] merge-base: add --merge-child option John Keeping
2013-05-11 12:23 ` [RFC/PATCH 1/2] commit: add commit_list_contains function John Keeping
2013-05-11 12:23 ` [RFC/PATCH 2/2] merge-base: add --merge-child option John Keeping
2013-05-11 17:54 ` [RFC/PATCH 0/2] " Junio C Hamano
2013-05-11 18:48 ` John Keeping
2013-05-12 15:44 ` Kevin Bracey
2013-05-12 16:28 ` John Keeping
2013-05-12 16:33 ` John Keeping
2013-05-12 17:14 ` Kevin Bracey
2013-05-12 22:22 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-05-13 14:26 ` Kevin Bracey
2013-05-13 14:45 ` Michael J Gruber
2013-05-19 12:40 ` log --cherry and merges (was [RFC/PATCH 0/2] merge-base: add --merge-child option) John Keeping
2013-05-20 6:43 ` Jonathan Nieder
2013-05-13 15:00 ` [PATCH 0/2] Make --ancestry-path A...B work Kevin Bracey
2013-05-13 15:00 ` [PATCH 1/2] t6019: demonstrate --ancestry-path A...B breakage Kevin Bracey
2013-05-13 15:00 ` [PATCH 2/2] revision.c: treat A...B merge bases as if manually specified Kevin Bracey
2013-05-13 16:04 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-05-12 16:58 ` John Keeping [this message]
2013-05-12 17:29 ` [RFC/PATCH 0/2] merge-base: add --merge-child option Kevin Bracey
2013-05-13 5:02 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-05-13 7:52 ` John Keeping
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=20130512165829.GM2299@serenity.lan \
--to=john@keeping.me.uk \
--cc=git@drmicha.warpmail.net \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=jrnieder@gmail.com \
--cc=kevin@bracey.fi \
--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 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).