Git development
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de>
To: Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im>
Cc: Philip Oakley via GitGitGadget <gitgitgadget@gmail.com>,
	 git@vger.kernel.org, Philip Oakley <philipoakley@iee.email>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/6] hash algorithms: use size_t for section lengths
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2026 16:48:06 +0200 (CEST)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <8acdcffb-e49f-12fe-ffd7-19f0799c91d4@gmx.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ai-5VmawU2MRiAHQ@pks.im>

Hi Patrick,

On Tue, 16 Jun 2026, Patrick Steinhardt wrote:

> On Thu, Jun 04, 2026 at 05:15:09PM +0000, Philip Oakley via GitGitGadget wrote:
> > diff --git a/object-file.c b/object-file.c
> > index 1f5f9daf24..c648cecd80 100644
> > --- a/object-file.c
> > +++ b/object-file.c
> > @@ -581,7 +581,7 @@ static void write_object_file_prepare(const struct git_hash_algo *algo,
> >  	/* Generate the header */
> >  	*hdrlen = format_object_header(hdr, *hdrlen, type, len);
> >  
> > -	/* Sha1.. */
> > +	/* Hash (function pointers) computation */
> >  	hash_object_body(algo, &c, buf, len, oid, hdr, hdrlen);
> >  }
> >  
> 
> Thanks for updating this comment while at it :)

It wasn't my idea, it was Claude Opus'. I would have left it as-is, but
then decided that it's actually a good change and not worth splitting out
into a separate commit.

> > diff --git a/t/t1007-hash-object.sh b/t/t1007-hash-object.sh
> > index 7867fd1dbf..10382a815e 100755
> > --- a/t/t1007-hash-object.sh
> > +++ b/t/t1007-hash-object.sh
> > @@ -261,7 +261,7 @@ test_expect_success '--stdin outside of repository (uses default hash)' '
> >  	test_cmp expect actual
> >  '
> >  
> > -test_expect_failure EXPENSIVE,SIZE_T_IS_64BIT,!LONG_IS_64BIT \
> > +test_expect_success EXPENSIVE,SIZE_T_IS_64BIT,!LONG_IS_64BIT \
> >  		'files over 4GB hash literally' '
> >  	test-tool genzeros $((5*1024*1024*1024)) >big &&
> >  	test_oid large5GB >expect &&
> 
> Previously we required `!LONG_IS_64BIT`, because the test would have
> succeeded on platforms where it is 64 bit wide. But now that this test
> works on all platforms I rather wonder whether we should completely drop
> that prerequisite here, as we expect it to pass regardless of whether or
> not long is 64 bit now.

Good point!

Thank you for the review,
Johannes

  reply	other threads:[~2026-06-16 14:48 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-06-04 17:15 [PATCH 0/6] Support hashing objects larger than 4GB on Windows Johannes Schindelin via GitGitGadget
2026-06-04 17:15 ` [PATCH 1/6] hash-object: demonstrate a >4GB/LLP64 problem Philip Oakley via GitGitGadget
2026-06-04 17:15 ` [PATCH 2/6] object-file.c: use size_t for header lengths Philip Oakley via GitGitGadget
2026-06-15  8:35   ` Patrick Steinhardt
2026-06-16 14:48     ` Johannes Schindelin
2026-06-04 17:15 ` [PATCH 3/6] hash algorithms: use size_t for section lengths Philip Oakley via GitGitGadget
2026-06-15  8:35   ` Patrick Steinhardt
2026-06-16 14:48     ` Johannes Schindelin [this message]
2026-06-04 17:15 ` [PATCH 4/6] hash-object --stdin: verify that it works with >4GB/LLP64 Philip Oakley via GitGitGadget
2026-06-15  8:35   ` Patrick Steinhardt
2026-06-04 17:15 ` [PATCH 5/6] hash-object: add another >4GB/LLP64 test case Philip Oakley via GitGitGadget
2026-06-15  8:35   ` Patrick Steinhardt
2026-06-16 14:48     ` Johannes Schindelin
2026-06-04 17:15 ` [PATCH 6/6] hash-object: add a >4GB/LLP64 test case using filtered input Philip Oakley via GitGitGadget
2026-06-04 21:56 ` [PATCH 0/6] Support hashing objects larger than 4GB on Windows Philip Oakley
2026-06-08 23:56   ` Junio C Hamano
2026-06-16 14:49 ` [PATCH v2 " Johannes Schindelin via GitGitGadget
2026-06-16 14:49   ` [PATCH v2 1/6] hash-object: demonstrate a >4GB/LLP64 problem Philip Oakley via GitGitGadget
2026-06-16 14:49   ` [PATCH v2 2/6] object-file.c: use size_t for header lengths Philip Oakley via GitGitGadget
2026-06-16 14:49   ` [PATCH v2 3/6] hash algorithms: use size_t for section lengths Philip Oakley via GitGitGadget
2026-06-16 14:49   ` [PATCH v2 4/6] hash-object --stdin: verify that it works with >4GB/LLP64 Philip Oakley via GitGitGadget
2026-06-16 14:49   ` [PATCH v2 5/6] hash-object: add another >4GB/LLP64 test case Philip Oakley via GitGitGadget
2026-06-16 14:49   ` [PATCH v2 6/6] hash-object: add a >4GB/LLP64 test case using filtered input Philip Oakley via GitGitGadget
2026-06-16 16:09   ` [PATCH v2 0/6] Support hashing objects larger than 4GB on Windows Junio C Hamano

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=8acdcffb-e49f-12fe-ffd7-19f0799c91d4@gmx.de \
    --to=johannes.schindelin@gmx.de \
    --cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=gitgitgadget@gmail.com \
    --cc=philipoakley@iee.email \
    --cc=ps@pks.im \
    /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