From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 04/10] pkt-line: change error message for oversized packet Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2013 01:40:17 -0800 Message-ID: <7vd2vyarjy.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> References: <20130218091203.GB17003@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20130218092221.GD5096@sigill.intra.peff.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Jonathan Nieder , git@vger.kernel.org, "Shawn O. Pearce" To: Jeff King X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon Feb 18 10:40:45 2013 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 1U7NDI-0000Sx-7v for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Mon, 18 Feb 2013 10:40:44 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757230Ab3BRJkU (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Feb 2013 04:40:20 -0500 Received: from b-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com ([208.72.237.35]:54484 "EHLO smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752505Ab3BRJkT (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Feb 2013 04:40:19 -0500 Received: from smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by b-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3E7B39D7D; Mon, 18 Feb 2013 04:40:19 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=gHpgz0Y8xu6HpBhpqJkXIDdwyvE=; b=iIENw2 TE5pP8pchmYlZo504tSXv5aNmSVwPJh7/Ig/tOy19t0iEp+ckQywXCFA0WkifcSv 9o2Zdv+N1bOs4NWzLkc4OhgmBeEykGaYuJ8JxbEsvyHBcIQYnbvyT5WsIOS4RU4S qde5Uef6tQdvIoyVAUZndj5Mpa7vRBNpO+Ozc= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=wOu16z85x6WGBugNjlrShkKDXX5oNhKG vUc96BA0NTRa30yON/CemgRLjpToKFSXNNJ4q71kzoV7v3QUhWFk078G2/T8moni pOsnrfri2hliz3RNsjIHbyMTH50wxVN5BukpoKFUKR08Rw64IWF+ZBR2hd5OckLN B3KR6hUku7g= Received: from b-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by b-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 340019D74; Mon, 18 Feb 2013 04:40:19 -0500 (EST) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [98.234.214.94]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by b-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id ADA6A9D73; Mon, 18 Feb 2013 04:40:18 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: <20130218092221.GD5096@sigill.intra.peff.net> (Jeff King's message of "Mon, 18 Feb 2013 04:22:21 -0500") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.2 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 34D5B592-79AF-11E2-B11C-ACA62E706CDE-77302942!b-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Jeff King writes: > I'm really tempted to bump all of our 1000-byte buffers to just use > LARGE_PACKET_MAX. If we provided a packet_read variant that used a > static buffer (which is fine for all but one or two callers), then it > would not take much memory... I thought that 1000-byte limit was kept when we introduced the 64k interface to interoperate with other side that does not yet support the 64k interface. Is your justification that such an old version of Git no longer matters in the real world (which is true, I think), or we use 1000-byte limit in some codepaths even when we know that we are talking with a 64k-capable version of Git on the other side?