From: Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im>
To: Christian Couder <christian.couder@gmail.com>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>,
Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com>,
Karthik Nayak <karthik.188@gmail.com>,
Christian Couder <chriscool@tuxfamily.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] promisor-remote: refactor to get rid of 'struct strvec'
Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2025 12:13:34 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aAdrzlUX61TK1x8_@pks.im> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20250414160343.2216312-3-christian.couder@gmail.com>
On Mon, Apr 14, 2025 at 06:03:41PM +0200, Christian Couder wrote:
> diff --git a/promisor-remote.c b/promisor-remote.c
> index 5801ebfd9b..0fb07f25af 100644
> --- a/promisor-remote.c
> +++ b/promisor-remote.c
> @@ -314,10 +314,38 @@ static int allow_unsanitized(char ch)
> return ch > 32 && ch < 127;
> }
>
> -static void promisor_info_vecs(struct repository *repo,
> - struct strvec *names,
> - struct strvec *urls)
> +/*
> + * Linked list for promisor remotes.
> + *
> + * 'fields' should not be sorted, as we will rely on the order we put
> + * things into it. So, for example, 'string_list_append()' should be
> + * used instead of 'string_list_insert()'.
> + */
> +struct promisor_info {
> + struct promisor_info *next;
> + struct string_list fields;
> +};
> +
> +static void free_info_list(struct promisor_info *p)
Nit: nowadays we would call this something like
`promisor_info_list_free()`, with the name of the subsystem coming
first.
> char *promisor_remote_info(struct repository *repo)
> {
> struct strbuf sb = STRBUF_INIT;
> int advertise_promisors = 0;
> - struct strvec names = STRVEC_INIT;
> - struct strvec urls = STRVEC_INIT;
> + struct promisor_info *info_list;
> + struct promisor_info *r, *p;
>
> git_config_get_bool("promisor.advertise", &advertise_promisors);
>
> if (!advertise_promisors)
> return NULL;
>
> - promisor_info_vecs(repo, &names, &urls);
> + info_list = promisor_info_list(repo);
>
> - if (!names.nr)
> + if (!info_list)
> return NULL;
>
> - for (size_t i = 0; i < names.nr; i++) {
> - if (i)
> + for (p = NULL, r = info_list; r; p = r, r = r->next) {
> + struct string_list_item *item;
> + int first = 1;
> +
> + if (r != info_list)
> strbuf_addch(&sb, ';');
> - strbuf_addstr(&sb, "name=");
> - strbuf_addstr_urlencode(&sb, names.v[i], allow_unsanitized);
> - strbuf_addstr(&sb, ",url=");
> - strbuf_addstr_urlencode(&sb, urls.v[i], allow_unsanitized);
> +
> + for_each_string_list_item(item, &r->fields) {
> + if (first)
> + first = 0;
> + else
> + strbuf_addch(&sb, ',');
> + strbuf_addf(&sb, "%s=", item->string);
> + strbuf_addstr_urlencode(&sb, (char *)item->util, allow_unsanitized);
> + }
> }
>
> - strvec_clear(&names);
> - strvec_clear(&urls);
> + free_info_list(p);
I don't quite follow the usage pattern of `info_list` here. My
expectation is that we'd:
1. Acquire the promisor info list.
2. Iterate through each of its items.
3. Free the complete list.
But why do we free `p` here? Shouldn't we free `info_list`? And if we
did so, can't we drop `p` completely and just iterate through the list
via `r`?
> return strbuf_detach(&sb, NULL);
> }
>
> /*
> - * Find first index of 'nicks' where there is 'nick'. 'nick' is
> - * compared case sensitively to the strings in 'nicks'. If not found
> - * 'nicks->nr' is returned.
> + * Find first element of 'p' where the 'name' field is 'nick'. 'nick'
> + * is compared case sensitively to the strings in 'p'. If not found
> + * NULL is returned.
> */
> -static size_t remote_nick_find(struct strvec *nicks, const char *nick)
> +static struct promisor_info *remote_nick_find(struct promisor_info *p, const char *nick)
> {
> - for (size_t i = 0; i < nicks->nr; i++)
> - if (!strcmp(nicks->v[i], nick))
> - return i;
> - return nicks->nr;
> + for (; p; p = p->next) {
> + assert(!strcmp(p->fields.items[0].string, "name"));
Why do we add this assert now? And if we want to keep it, shouldn't it
rather be `BUG()`?
> @@ -414,11 +461,16 @@ static int should_accept_remote(enum accept_promisor accept,
> return 0;
> }
>
> - if (!strcmp(urls->v[i], remote_url))
> + if (strcmp(p->fields.items[1].string, "url"))
> + BUG("Bad info_list for remote '%s'", remote_name);
It feels somewhat fragile to assume hardcoded locations of each of the
keys in `fields.items`. Would it be preferable to instead have a
function that looks up the index by key?
Patrick
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-04-22 10:13 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 107+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-04-14 16:03 [PATCH 0/4] Make the "promisor-remote" capability support extra fields Christian Couder
2025-04-14 16:03 ` [PATCH 1/4] config: move is_config_key_char() to "config.h" Christian Couder
2025-04-14 16:03 ` [PATCH 2/4] promisor-remote: refactor to get rid of 'struct strvec' Christian Couder
2025-04-22 10:13 ` Patrick Steinhardt [this message]
2025-04-29 15:12 ` Christian Couder
2025-04-14 16:03 ` [PATCH 3/4] promisor-remote: allow a server to advertise extra fields Christian Couder
2025-04-14 22:04 ` Junio C Hamano
2025-04-22 10:13 ` Patrick Steinhardt
2025-04-29 15:12 ` Christian Couder
2025-04-29 15:12 ` Christian Couder
2025-04-14 16:03 ` [PATCH 4/4] promisor-remote: allow a client to check " Christian Couder
2025-04-29 14:52 ` [PATCH v2 0/3] Make the "promisor-remote" capability support more fields Christian Couder
2025-04-29 14:52 ` [PATCH v2 1/3] promisor-remote: refactor to get rid of 'struct strvec' Christian Couder
2025-05-07 8:25 ` Patrick Steinhardt
2025-05-19 14:10 ` Christian Couder
2025-05-07 12:27 ` Karthik Nayak
2025-05-19 14:10 ` Christian Couder
2025-04-29 14:52 ` [PATCH v2 2/3] promisor-remote: allow a server to advertise more fields Christian Couder
2025-05-07 8:25 ` Patrick Steinhardt
2025-05-19 14:11 ` Christian Couder
2025-05-27 7:50 ` Patrick Steinhardt
2025-05-27 15:30 ` Junio C Hamano
2025-06-11 13:46 ` Christian Couder
2025-05-07 12:44 ` Karthik Nayak
2025-05-19 14:11 ` Christian Couder
2025-04-29 14:52 ` [PATCH v2 3/3] promisor-remote: allow a client to check fields Christian Couder
2025-05-07 8:25 ` Patrick Steinhardt
2025-05-19 14:11 ` Christian Couder
2025-05-02 9:34 ` [PATCH v2 0/3] Make the "promisor-remote" capability support more fields Christian Couder
2025-05-19 14:12 ` [PATCH v3 0/5] " Christian Couder
2025-05-19 14:12 ` [PATCH v3 1/5] promisor-remote: refactor to get rid of 'struct strvec' Christian Couder
2025-05-20 9:37 ` Karthik Nayak
2025-05-20 13:32 ` Christian Couder
2025-05-20 16:45 ` Junio C Hamano
2025-05-21 6:33 ` Christian Couder
2025-05-21 15:00 ` Junio C Hamano
2025-06-11 13:47 ` Christian Couder
2025-05-19 14:12 ` [PATCH v3 2/5] promisor-remote: allow a server to advertise more fields Christian Couder
2025-05-21 20:31 ` Justin Tobler
2025-06-11 13:46 ` Christian Couder
2025-05-27 7:51 ` Patrick Steinhardt
2025-06-11 13:46 ` Christian Couder
2025-05-19 14:12 ` [PATCH v3 3/5] promisor-remote: refactor how we parse advertised fields Christian Couder
2025-05-19 14:12 ` [PATCH v3 4/5] promisor-remote: allow a client to check fields Christian Couder
2025-05-19 14:12 ` [PATCH v3 5/5] promisor-remote: use string constants for 'name' and 'url' too Christian Couder
2025-06-11 13:45 ` [PATCH v4 0/5] Make the "promisor-remote" capability support more fields Christian Couder
2025-06-11 13:45 ` [PATCH v4 1/5] promisor-remote: refactor to get rid of 'struct strvec' Christian Couder
2025-06-19 11:53 ` Karthik Nayak
2025-06-25 12:53 ` Christian Couder
2025-06-23 19:38 ` Justin Tobler
2025-06-25 12:52 ` Christian Couder
2025-06-11 13:45 ` [PATCH v4 2/5] promisor-remote: allow a server to advertise more fields Christian Couder
2025-06-19 12:15 ` Karthik Nayak
2025-06-25 12:51 ` Christian Couder
2025-06-23 19:59 ` Justin Tobler
2025-06-25 12:51 ` Christian Couder
2025-06-11 13:45 ` [PATCH v4 3/5] promisor-remote: refactor how we parse advertised fields Christian Couder
2025-06-11 13:45 ` [PATCH v4 4/5] promisor-remote: allow a client to check fields Christian Couder
2025-06-11 13:45 ` [PATCH v4 5/5] promisor-remote: use string constants for 'name' and 'url' too Christian Couder
2025-06-19 12:18 ` [PATCH v4 0/5] Make the "promisor-remote" capability support more fields Karthik Nayak
2025-06-25 12:50 ` [PATCH v5 " Christian Couder
2025-06-25 12:50 ` [PATCH v5 1/5] promisor-remote: refactor to get rid of 'struct strvec' Christian Couder
2025-06-25 17:05 ` Junio C Hamano
2025-07-21 14:08 ` Christian Couder
2025-06-25 12:50 ` [PATCH v5 2/5] promisor-remote: allow a server to advertise more fields Christian Couder
2025-06-25 22:29 ` Junio C Hamano
2025-07-21 14:09 ` Christian Couder
2025-07-21 18:53 ` Junio C Hamano
2025-07-31 7:20 ` Christian Couder
2025-06-27 18:47 ` Jean-Noël Avila
2025-07-21 14:09 ` Christian Couder
2025-06-25 12:50 ` [PATCH v5 3/5] promisor-remote: refactor how we parse advertised fields Christian Couder
2025-06-25 12:50 ` [PATCH v5 4/5] promisor-remote: allow a client to check fields Christian Couder
2025-06-25 12:50 ` [PATCH v5 5/5] promisor-remote: use string constants for 'name' and 'url' too Christian Couder
2025-07-07 22:35 ` [PATCH v5 0/5] Make the "promisor-remote" capability support more fields Junio C Hamano
2025-07-08 3:34 ` Christian Couder
2025-07-21 14:10 ` [PATCH v6 " Christian Couder
2025-07-21 14:10 ` [PATCH v6 1/5] promisor-remote: refactor to get rid of 'struct strvec' Christian Couder
2025-07-21 14:10 ` [PATCH v6 2/5] promisor-remote: allow a server to advertise more fields Christian Couder
2025-07-21 14:10 ` [PATCH v6 3/5] promisor-remote: refactor how we parse advertised fields Christian Couder
2025-07-21 20:39 ` Junio C Hamano
2025-07-31 7:22 ` Christian Couder
2025-07-21 14:10 ` [PATCH v6 4/5] promisor-remote: allow a client to check fields Christian Couder
2025-07-21 20:59 ` Junio C Hamano
2025-07-31 7:21 ` Christian Couder
2025-07-21 14:10 ` [PATCH v6 5/5] promisor-remote: use string constants for 'name' and 'url' too Christian Couder
2025-07-21 20:18 ` Junio C Hamano
2025-07-31 7:23 ` [PATCH v7 0/5] Make the "promisor-remote" capability support more fields Christian Couder
2025-07-31 7:23 ` [PATCH v7 1/5] promisor-remote: refactor to get rid of 'struct strvec' Christian Couder
2025-07-31 7:23 ` [PATCH v7 2/5] promisor-remote: allow a server to advertise more fields Christian Couder
2025-07-31 7:23 ` [PATCH v7 3/5] promisor-remote: refactor how we parse advertised fields Christian Couder
2025-07-31 16:03 ` Junio C Hamano
2025-09-08 5:31 ` Christian Couder
2025-07-31 7:23 ` [PATCH v7 4/5] promisor-remote: allow a client to check fields Christian Couder
2025-07-31 7:23 ` [PATCH v7 5/5] promisor-remote: use string constants for 'name' and 'url' too Christian Couder
2025-07-31 15:48 ` [PATCH v7 0/5] Make the "promisor-remote" capability support more fields Junio C Hamano
2025-08-28 23:32 ` Junio C Hamano
2025-09-08 5:36 ` Christian Couder
2025-09-08 5:30 ` [PATCH v8 0/7] " Christian Couder
2025-09-08 5:30 ` [PATCH v8 1/7] promisor-remote: refactor to get rid of 'struct strvec' Christian Couder
2025-09-08 5:30 ` [PATCH v8 2/7] promisor-remote: allow a server to advertise more fields Christian Couder
2025-09-08 5:30 ` [PATCH v8 3/7] promisor-remote: use string constants for 'name' and 'url' too Christian Couder
2025-09-08 5:30 ` [PATCH v8 4/7] promisor-remote: refactor how we parse advertised fields Christian Couder
2025-09-08 5:30 ` [PATCH v8 5/7] promisor-remote: use string_list_split() in filter_promisor_remote() Christian Couder
2025-09-08 5:30 ` [PATCH v8 6/7] promisor-remote: allow a client to check fields Christian Couder
2025-09-08 5:30 ` [PATCH v8 7/7] promisor-remote: use string_list_split() in mark_remotes_as_accepted() Christian Couder
2025-09-08 17:34 ` [PATCH v8 0/7] Make the "promisor-remote" capability support more fields 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=aAdrzlUX61TK1x8_@pks.im \
--to=ps@pks.im \
--cc=chriscool@tuxfamily.org \
--cc=christian.couder@gmail.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=karthik.188@gmail.com \
--cc=me@ttaylorr.com \
/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).