* [PATCH] submodule-parallel-fetch: make some file local symbols static
@ 2015-09-25 15:15 Ramsay Jones
2015-09-25 15:40 ` Jacob Keller
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Ramsay Jones @ 2015-09-25 15:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stefan Beller; +Cc: Junio C Hamano, GIT Mailing-list
Signed-off-by: Ramsay Jones <ramsay@ramsayjones.plus.com>
---
Hi Stefan,
When you next re-roll the patches for your
'sb/submodule-parallel-fetch' branch, could you please squash
parts of this into the relevant patches. [which would correspond
to commits a93fb7a ("run-command: add an asynchronous parallel
child processor", 22-09-2015) and 58713c8 ("fetch_populated_submodules:
use new parallel job processing", 22-09-2015).]
Thanks!
Also, you might consider renaming some (file local) functions with
really long names, to something a little shorter, like (say):
handle_submodule_fetch_start_err -> fetch_start_failure
handle_submodule_fetch_finish -> fetch_finish
(but, as I have said several times, I'm not good at naming things ... ;-)
Also, you could move the definition of get_next_submodule() to be
above/before fetch_populated_submodules() so that you can remove the
forward declaration.
[Note these issues were spotted by sparse and static-check.pl]
HTH
ATB,
Ramsay Jones
run-command.c | 12 ++++++------
submodule.c | 12 ++++++------
test-run-command.c | 6 +++---
3 files changed, 15 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)
diff --git a/run-command.c b/run-command.c
index 528a4fb..6ca0151 100644
--- a/run-command.c
+++ b/run-command.c
@@ -902,9 +902,9 @@ struct parallel_processes {
struct strbuf buffered_output; /* of finished children */
};
-void default_start_failure(void *data,
- struct child_process *cp,
- struct strbuf *err)
+static void default_start_failure(void *data,
+ struct child_process *cp,
+ struct strbuf *err)
{
int i;
struct strbuf sb = STRBUF_INIT;
@@ -915,9 +915,9 @@ void default_start_failure(void *data,
die_errno("Starting a child failed:%s", sb.buf);
}
-void default_return_value(void *data,
- struct child_process *cp,
- int result)
+static void default_return_value(void *data,
+ struct child_process *cp,
+ int result)
{
int i;
struct strbuf sb = STRBUF_INIT;
diff --git a/submodule.c b/submodule.c
index f362d6a..d786a76 100644
--- a/submodule.c
+++ b/submodule.c
@@ -620,16 +620,16 @@ struct submodule_parallel_fetch {
};
#define SPF_INIT {0, ARGV_ARRAY_INIT, NULL, NULL, 0, 0, 0}
-int get_next_submodule(void *data, struct child_process *cp,
- struct strbuf *err);
+static int get_next_submodule(void *data, struct child_process *cp,
+ struct strbuf *err);
-void handle_submodule_fetch_start_err(void *data, struct child_process *cp, struct strbuf *err)
+static void handle_submodule_fetch_start_err(void *data, struct child_process *cp, struct strbuf *err)
{
struct submodule_parallel_fetch *spf = data;
spf->result = 1;
}
-void handle_submodule_fetch_finish( void *data, struct child_process *cp, int retvalue)
+static void handle_submodule_fetch_finish( void *data, struct child_process *cp, int retvalue)
{
struct submodule_parallel_fetch *spf = data;
@@ -673,8 +673,8 @@ out:
return spf.result;
}
-int get_next_submodule(void *data, struct child_process *cp,
- struct strbuf *err)
+static int get_next_submodule(void *data, struct child_process *cp,
+ struct strbuf *err)
{
int ret = 0;
struct submodule_parallel_fetch *spf = data;
diff --git a/test-run-command.c b/test-run-command.c
index 94c6eee..2555791 100644
--- a/test-run-command.c
+++ b/test-run-command.c
@@ -16,9 +16,9 @@
#include <errno.h>
static int number_callbacks;
-int parallel_next(void *data,
- struct child_process *cp,
- struct strbuf *err)
+static int parallel_next(void *data,
+ struct child_process *cp,
+ struct strbuf *err)
{
struct child_process *d = data;
if (number_callbacks >= 4)
--
2.5.0
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] submodule-parallel-fetch: make some file local symbols static
2015-09-25 15:15 Ramsay Jones
@ 2015-09-25 15:40 ` Jacob Keller
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Jacob Keller @ 2015-09-25 15:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ramsay Jones; +Cc: Stefan Beller, Junio C Hamano, GIT Mailing-list
On Fri, Sep 25, 2015 at 8:15 AM, Ramsay Jones
<ramsay@ramsayjones.plus.com> wrote:
> [Note these issues were spotted by sparse and static-check.pl]
Any chance you got a link to docs about static-check.pl? I've never
heard of this...
Regards,
Jake
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* [PATCH] submodule-parallel-fetch: make some file local symbols static
@ 2015-10-01 12:02 Ramsay Jones
2015-10-01 17:05 ` Stefan Beller
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Ramsay Jones @ 2015-10-01 12:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stefan Beller; +Cc: Junio C Hamano, GIT Mailing-list
Commits 0fc1fdb0 ("fetch_populated_submodules: use new parallel job
processing", 28-09-2015) and 60f24f52 ("run-command: add an asynchronous
parallel child processor", 28-09-2015) both introduce external symbols
which only require file scope visibility. In order to reduce the
visibility, apply the static keyword to their declarations.
Signed-off-by: Ramsay Jones <ramsay@ramsayjones.plus.com>
---
Hi Stefan,
No, despite the same subject, this is not the same patch that I sent
you last week! :-D
Could you please squash parts of this into the patches corresponding
to the above mentioned commits.
Thanks!
BTW, I would once again suggest that you could move the definition of
get_next_submodule() to be above/before fetch_populated_submodules()
so that you can remove the forward declaration.
ATB,
Ramsay Jones
run-command.c | 2 +-
submodule.c | 8 ++++----
2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
diff --git a/run-command.c b/run-command.c
index 341b23b..347d22e 100644
--- a/run-command.c
+++ b/run-command.c
@@ -865,7 +865,7 @@ int capture_command(struct child_process *cmd, struct strbuf *buf, size_t hint)
return finish_command(cmd);
}
-struct parallel_processes {
+static struct parallel_processes {
void *data;
int max_processes;
diff --git a/submodule.c b/submodule.c
index bd6e208..638efb5 100644
--- a/submodule.c
+++ b/submodule.c
@@ -622,8 +622,8 @@ struct submodule_parallel_fetch {
};
#define SPF_INIT {0, ARGV_ARRAY_INIT, NULL, NULL, 0, 0, 0}
-int get_next_submodule(void *data, struct child_process *cp,
- struct strbuf *err);
+static int get_next_submodule(void *data, struct child_process *cp,
+ struct strbuf *err);
static int fetch_start_failure(void *data, struct child_process *cp,
struct strbuf *err)
@@ -682,8 +682,8 @@ out:
return spf.result;
}
-int get_next_submodule(void *data, struct child_process *cp,
- struct strbuf *err)
+static int get_next_submodule(void *data, struct child_process *cp,
+ struct strbuf *err)
{
int ret = 0;
struct submodule_parallel_fetch *spf = data;
--
2.6.0
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] submodule-parallel-fetch: make some file local symbols static
2015-10-01 12:02 [PATCH] submodule-parallel-fetch: make some file local symbols static Ramsay Jones
@ 2015-10-01 17:05 ` Stefan Beller
2015-10-01 18:43 ` Ramsay Jones
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Stefan Beller @ 2015-10-01 17:05 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ramsay Jones; +Cc: Stefan Beller, Junio C Hamano, GIT Mailing-list
On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 5:02 AM, Ramsay Jones
<ramsay@ramsayjones.plus.com> wrote:
>
> Commits 0fc1fdb0 ("fetch_populated_submodules: use new parallel job
> processing", 28-09-2015) and 60f24f52 ("run-command: add an asynchronous
> parallel child processor", 28-09-2015) both introduce external symbols
> which only require file scope visibility. In order to reduce the
> visibility, apply the static keyword to their declarations.
>
> Signed-off-by: Ramsay Jones <ramsay@ramsayjones.plus.com>
> ---
>
> Hi Stefan,
>
> No, despite the same subject, this is not the same patch that I sent
> you last week! :-D
>
> Could you please squash parts of this into the patches corresponding
> to the above mentioned commits.
I am sorry for the need to send this second patch. :(
>
> Thanks!
>
> BTW, I would once again suggest that you could move the definition of
> get_next_submodule() to be above/before fetch_populated_submodules()
> so that you can remove the forward declaration.
>
> ATB,
> Ramsay Jones
>
> run-command.c | 2 +-
> submodule.c | 8 ++++----
> 2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/run-command.c b/run-command.c
> index 341b23b..347d22e 100644
> --- a/run-command.c
> +++ b/run-command.c
> @@ -865,7 +865,7 @@ int capture_command(struct child_process *cmd, struct strbuf *buf, size_t hint)
> return finish_command(cmd);
> }
>
> -struct parallel_processes {
> +static struct parallel_processes {
will pickup in a reroll
> void *data;
>
> int max_processes;
> diff --git a/submodule.c b/submodule.c
> index bd6e208..638efb5 100644
> --- a/submodule.c
> +++ b/submodule.c
> @@ -622,8 +622,8 @@ struct submodule_parallel_fetch {
> };
> #define SPF_INIT {0, ARGV_ARRAY_INIT, NULL, NULL, 0, 0, 0}
>
> -int get_next_submodule(void *data, struct child_process *cp,
> - struct strbuf *err);
> +static int get_next_submodule(void *data, struct child_process *cp,
> + struct strbuf *err);
I thought I had this in yesterdays reroll (v6). Oh you're referring to
the version
from the 28th (I forgot to label them v5 I suppose).
I will also get rid of the forward declaration.
>
> static int fetch_start_failure(void *data, struct child_process *cp,
> struct strbuf *err)
> @@ -682,8 +682,8 @@ out:
> return spf.result;
> }
>
> -int get_next_submodule(void *data, struct child_process *cp,
> - struct strbuf *err)
> +static int get_next_submodule(void *data, struct child_process *cp,
> + struct strbuf *err)
> {
> int ret = 0;
> struct submodule_parallel_fetch *spf = data;
> --
> 2.6.0
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] submodule-parallel-fetch: make some file local symbols static
2015-10-01 17:05 ` Stefan Beller
@ 2015-10-01 18:43 ` Ramsay Jones
2015-10-02 17:45 ` Junio C Hamano
0 siblings, 1 reply; 6+ messages in thread
From: Ramsay Jones @ 2015-10-01 18:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stefan Beller; +Cc: Stefan Beller, Junio C Hamano, GIT Mailing-list
On 01/10/15 18:05, Stefan Beller wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 5:02 AM, Ramsay Jones
> <ramsay@ramsayjones.plus.com> wrote:
>>
[snip]
>> diff --git a/run-command.c b/run-command.c
>> index 341b23b..347d22e 100644
>> --- a/run-command.c
>> +++ b/run-command.c
>> @@ -865,7 +865,7 @@ int capture_command(struct child_process *cmd, struct strbuf *buf, size_t hint)
>> return finish_command(cmd);
>> }
>>
>> -struct parallel_processes {
>> +static struct parallel_processes {
>
> will pickup in a reroll
Thanks
>
>> void *data;
>>
>> int max_processes;
>> diff --git a/submodule.c b/submodule.c
>> index bd6e208..638efb5 100644
>> --- a/submodule.c
>> +++ b/submodule.c
>> @@ -622,8 +622,8 @@ struct submodule_parallel_fetch {
>> };
>> #define SPF_INIT {0, ARGV_ARRAY_INIT, NULL, NULL, 0, 0, 0}
>>
>> -int get_next_submodule(void *data, struct child_process *cp,
>> - struct strbuf *err);
>> +static int get_next_submodule(void *data, struct child_process *cp,
>> + struct strbuf *err);
>
> I thought I had this in yesterdays reroll (v6). Oh you're referring to
> the version
> from the 28th (I forgot to label them v5 I suppose).
Ah! I thought I'd seen it on the list. (I thought I was going crazy) ;-)
Sorry, my fault. I just assumed that today's pu branch would have your
latest patches - I didn't actually check that.
Note that the first hunk, above, is actually new (I hadn't noticed it
before).
>
> I will also get rid of the forward declaration.
Thanks!
ATB,
Ramsay Jones
>
>>
>> static int fetch_start_failure(void *data, struct child_process *cp,
>> struct strbuf *err)
>> @@ -682,8 +682,8 @@ out:
>> return spf.result;
>> }
>>
>> -int get_next_submodule(void *data, struct child_process *cp,
>> - struct strbuf *err)
>> +static int get_next_submodule(void *data, struct child_process *cp,
>> + struct strbuf *err)
>> {
>> int ret = 0;
>> struct submodule_parallel_fetch *spf = data;
>> --
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] submodule-parallel-fetch: make some file local symbols static
2015-10-01 18:43 ` Ramsay Jones
@ 2015-10-02 17:45 ` Junio C Hamano
0 siblings, 0 replies; 6+ messages in thread
From: Junio C Hamano @ 2015-10-02 17:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Ramsay Jones; +Cc: Stefan Beller, Stefan Beller, GIT Mailing-list
Ramsay Jones <ramsay@ramsayjones.plus.com> writes:
>> I thought I had this in yesterdays reroll (v6). Oh you're referring to
>> the version
>> from the 28th (I forgot to label them v5 I suppose).
>
> Ah! I thought I'd seen it on the list. (I thought I was going crazy) ;-)
> Sorry, my fault. I just assumed that today's pu branch would have your
> latest patches - I didn't actually check that.
Sometimes I take a one-day vacation ;-)
Thanks.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 6+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2015-10-02 17:45 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2015-10-01 12:02 [PATCH] submodule-parallel-fetch: make some file local symbols static Ramsay Jones
2015-10-01 17:05 ` Stefan Beller
2015-10-01 18:43 ` Ramsay Jones
2015-10-02 17:45 ` Junio C Hamano
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2015-09-25 15:15 Ramsay Jones
2015-09-25 15:40 ` Jacob Keller
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).