From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] Soem core git optimizations Date: Sat, 10 May 2008 19:36:46 -0700 Message-ID: <7v4p958t35.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Git Mailing List To: Linus Torvalds X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sun May 11 04:37:57 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 1Jv1Rj-0003G9-K2 for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Sun, 11 May 2008 04:37:56 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754191AbYEKChE (ORCPT ); Sat, 10 May 2008 22:37:04 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754166AbYEKChD (ORCPT ); Sat, 10 May 2008 22:37:03 -0400 Received: from a-sasl-fastnet.sasl.smtp.pobox.com ([207.106.133.19]:43472 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754140AbYEKChA (ORCPT ); Sat, 10 May 2008 22:37:00 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by a-sasl-fastnet.sasl.smtp.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D4454084; Sat, 10 May 2008 22:36:59 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pobox.com (ip68-225-240-77.oc.oc.cox.net [68.225.240.77]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by a-sasl-fastnet.sasl.smtp.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 82F984080; Sat, 10 May 2008 22:36:53 -0400 (EDT) User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 212E8E94-1F03-11DD-A2B9-80001473D85F-77302942!a-sasl-fastnet.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Linus Torvalds writes: > I notice that Junio merged my fnmatch-avoidance patch, but I have a few > other optimizations that I track in my private tree that I have sent out > but probably didn't get much attention. They do matter from a performance > angle, even if not as much as avoiding fnmatch did. > ... > and while this probably doesn't matter on most loads, the reason I'm > re-sending is that I think it's pretty solid and core code. I've been > running with both of these patches (and some others) rebased on top of > Junio's tree for the last few weeks. Unfortunately this seems to depend on stuff still in 'next', and a trivial rebasing seems to break switching branches with "git checkout" in t4122 (switching from 'master' to 'test' will lose arch/i386/boot/Makefile). I'll take a hint and merge the "case insensitive" and "diff-submodule" series to 'master' and then apply these two --- the result does not have the git-checkout breakage.