From: David Aguilar <davvid@gmail.com>
To: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Cc: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>,
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>,
Git Mailing List <git@vger.kernel.org>,
John Keeping <john@keeping.me.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] cache.h: eliminate SHA-1 deprecation warnings on OS X 10.8
Date: Sat, 11 May 2013 02:17:10 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAJDDKr4DoEUw=4O_m-91Hsg4SRZzkn6yJPf_nBsPsEv0Weibrw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130511084543.GA1905@sigill.intra.peff.net>
On Sat, May 11, 2013 at 1:45 AM, Jeff King <peff@peff.net> wrote:
> On Sat, May 11, 2013 at 01:38:32AM -0700, David Aguilar wrote:
>
>> > Adding "--verify-objects" would sha1 the blobs, too, which might be more
>> > reasonable (or running "git fsck"). Something like "git add" on a large
>> > blob would also be a good test.
>>
>> Thanks. Here are the numbers with --verify-objects:
>>
>> $ time git rev-list --all --objects --verify-objects >/dev/null
>>
>> # CommonCrypto 32.24s user 4.65s system 99% cpu 37.098 total
>> # master 33.00s user 4.68s system 99% cpu 37.852 total
>> # BLK_SHA1 54.17s user 4.67s system 99% cpu 58.928 total
>>
>> Doing BLK_SHA1 seems like less of a good idea now, so I think my
>> latest re-roll might be the way to go...
>
> Wow, that's really terrible. What level of optimization do you compile
> with? With the other implementations, you are calling into
> (presumably) optimized library code, but with BLK_SHA1 you are getting
> whatever you just compiled.
>
> Here are three timings that show how big a difference that can make:
>
> openssl, -O0 0m21.152s
> BLK_SHA1, -O0 0m31.920s
> BLK_SHA1, -O3 0m19.652s
>
> So it is a win over openssl with optimizations on, but a pretty big loss
> otherwise.
Good catch. I had a config.mak without any -O flags in CFLAGS.
Here are the timings with -O3. We're back to parity.
$ time git rev-list --all --objects --verify-objects >/dev/null
# CommonCrypto 28.95s user 4.62s system 99% cpu 33.630 total
# master 29.81s user 4.70s system 99% cpu 34.760 total
# BLK_SHA1 29.80s user 4.62s system 99% cpu 34.505 total
If BLK_SHA1 were the default on all platforms then I wouldn't have
bothered with the SHA-1 patch. With this patch it makes it like Linux
in that Git can choose between the built-in functions and the external
library.
That's why I moved this patch to 3/3.. it could go either way.
--
David
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-05-11 9:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-05-11 2:44 [PATCH v2] cache.h: eliminate SHA-1 deprecation warnings on OS X 10.8 David Aguilar
2013-05-11 6:23 ` Jonathan Nieder
2013-05-11 7:11 ` David Aguilar
2013-05-11 8:22 ` Jeff King
2013-05-11 8:38 ` David Aguilar
2013-05-11 8:45 ` Jeff King
2013-05-11 9:17 ` David Aguilar [this message]
2013-05-11 9:50 ` Jeff King
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='CAJDDKr4DoEUw=4O_m-91Hsg4SRZzkn6yJPf_nBsPsEv0Weibrw@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=davvid@gmail.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=john@keeping.me.uk \
--cc=jrnieder@gmail.com \
--cc=peff@peff.net \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).