From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.6 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id D5CC42036D for ; Wed, 22 Nov 2017 03:17:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751565AbdKVDRF (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Nov 2017 22:17:05 -0500 Received: from cloud.peff.net ([104.130.231.41]:37228 "HELO cloud.peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1751443AbdKVDRE (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Nov 2017 22:17:04 -0500 Received: (qmail 18819 invoked by uid 109); 22 Nov 2017 03:17:04 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO peff.net) (10.0.1.2) by cloud.peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with SMTP; Wed, 22 Nov 2017 03:17:04 +0000 Authentication-Results: cloud.peff.net; auth=none Received: (qmail 30567 invoked by uid 111); 22 Nov 2017 03:17:19 -0000 Received: from sigill.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.7) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with ESMTPA; Tue, 21 Nov 2017 22:17:19 -0500 Authentication-Results: peff.net; auth=pass (cram-md5) smtp.auth=relayok Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Tue, 21 Nov 2017 22:17:01 -0500 Date: Tue, 21 Nov 2017 22:17:01 -0500 From: Jeff King To: Junio C Hamano Cc: git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] sha1_file: don't re-scan pack directory for null sha1 Message-ID: <20171122031701.GA16789@sigill> References: <20171120202607.tf2pvegqe35mhxjs@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20171120203523.c3pt5qi43e24ttqq@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20171121231739.GB21197@sigill> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 10:49:25AM +0900, Junio C Hamano wrote: > WRT existing codepaths that pass 0{40} and refuses to notice a > potential repository corruption (from getting a NULL for a non null > object name), I think we would need a sweep of the codebase and fix > them in the longer term. As long as that will happen someday, either > approach between "we know 'no loose object? let's redo the packs' is > the part that matters performance-wise, so let's do a short-cut only > for that" and "we know that callers that comes with 0{40} want to get > NULL back" should be OK, I would think. I agree. Let's go with the "v2 5/5" I posted then. I'll try to work up a patch for the fetch.c case I found tomorrow, but I suspect there are many more. But that's largely orthogonal to the series. -Peff