From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from fout-b4-smtp.messagingengine.com (fout-b4-smtp.messagingengine.com [202.12.124.147]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D6169416854 for ; Fri, 14 Aug 2026 07:41:42 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=202.12.124.147 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1786693312; cv=none; b=ujI77CbuGg72zKW9MdS206wKwImBVBQUYk6PENy7IwQaQ6KJvzwjO6/1cmOJn4OPwTAhokiNo0K6SEGu9Du5fURZNyvcnn+FUWnnQgnE7kdPu8wCbjT/gC1XFQPungP2SSje5BxU/hhtoZxnCrZ3aOPMh757lCy1RXKgjvAJJP8= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1786693312; c=relaxed/simple; bh=7zrn5NYclveAh80R4CSLvxvTu7pKoiuZXnX5Gco3Xqw=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=RcFN6le2rg81nIBnBx/KQE1FCBfAbX0v5YjCbhD+E1A3Uxo+xoWk7mOryWlNw2FOZ6IznB5rLJAFQZQILRfkrBhh1c6pkDdC5TxSkWsEuXZ8lwjlGcW+7YZklxvaFxGlFm/Jgq7fvCoNjLUfAv/rFrC0nXpf5rfuEQEPRhQ7GUE= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=pks.im; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pks.im; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=pks.im header.i=@pks.im header.b=UHG1Wnbi; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b=fcDS5ak/; arc=none smtp.client-ip=202.12.124.147 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=pks.im Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pks.im Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=pks.im header.i=@pks.im header.b="UHG1Wnbi"; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b="fcDS5ak/" Received: from phl-compute-02.internal (phl-compute-02.internal [10.202.2.42]) by mailfout.stl.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED8AB1D0034B; Fri, 14 Aug 2026 03:27:51 -0400 (EDT) Received: from phl-frontend-04 ([10.202.2.163]) by phl-compute-02.internal (MEProxy); Fri, 14 Aug 2026 03:27:52 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=pks.im; h=cc:cc :content-type:content-type:date:date:from:from:in-reply-to :in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:subject :subject:to:to; s=fm3; t=1786692471; x=1786778871; bh=KdPZzdtkuC gG8lKF0+KmeA4eqgy+dr7AXPcnWvjAB9k=; b=UHG1WnbiH+zDFHN7Z4kgn3hqbN P5Oey7x3amIBrLVOeiMBvNuDW5+wM6odFBzrsJk3zCS+k3amhFmDB9SsD9MQDXI2 coGf3tGHHV+bMkcvxSwnnlLCjMnfHOnvy29XA/N2G0uBDjfGZWtFhbmzU8goEHXQ jszYXjaSdayhK2Y3x+brkzlRfCmEcopk6M3lozRjvDFGe/rgyzLNit84s8DZSvwf N+68M0iyFlyzL9CDcIal4vXKyTjSlwYutYTq5vPZ+I83apnSh5BoeJsqh6mV6QWa n6dd3TiRgFEOZu6k5bynU7FxNhwLgbtnXX2Lafpwsn3k1Sp6Lbg2gXw31CCA== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-type:content-type:date:date :feedback-id:feedback-id:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:subject:subject:to :to:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm3; t= 1786692471; x=1786778871; bh=KdPZzdtkuCgG8lKF0+KmeA4eqgy+dr7AXPc nWvjAB9k=; b=fcDS5ak/xPQoJMWzFnjq6Sr02QNqkytl0prFuhcb9kvD5zPyD9G 40+uW6V7g3dLWltP+UwcnQpEp+FTt0wBVwieJq8lo54z4wj5Rd98cMDeIngLfM/G dd5up7C4o9wjaRaKPuAzTgAgmvz26Y0aA8X3qGvaQgtIxjwtE7n/RY5XS9L4AU4h +fKLuW6AoCQVIkd5NZCfPWt+OKvK2p7I4Wi14LdWx/hNJKjUSbiakn/+z9hnN9zE /QuAGfHi8edqZbl7OHstpkDbgPQUtWGw+RhR2uP/UEue/iAtfjVrXbHjY483ypqH SO6Ba3JRDgDnGDOaflIpy/ysItt2K/hZO4g== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: dmFkZTE3itlpFNUlyUroRVCo14rTJulh1TInroVxwL6COOeUL0oEZ5LTHxVaUOw9BqQMi/ WJKJE8haO0EsoGgUMOiP3sP1t8X8/QsuucxE9KbWjpHNt0GkyokQ6FgqQVr4H/dq0CzoLz hEfeYJiTTXOY6tT1uU2HsN0od2oZdBwVOgF5nFlE6MJ7rgzABf6etiSiQtyVusIKlGvu8r 1FdNpMldC2fXrIZrYh9e0fmEyWoNfjfUvq82BmvrANCt0+Mcr2Le5u/b0kidxl+dgWqzdP 3OAoLOEFvbw2yJ03J3igCE6gO0FRA/I8dbiO/OI5yoXSo6JghzCNDYyoWIeb2famobEicS E8wcLEu5GaFcRTthAHJEtLGYi4vZu/f+IGWu0eewsgu5WfjCB69GMXZlTo4ldTLj09cpL0 ZwDeO7G+pWdQSV2O1LnrRUxFdNV+1F0qD5PpZwnLSmtVcqp5+JuLqX1ZVqxaBa0TVpJzEo 5kUb70FXkdwTgt5yBVLG7jBVebal8Cwsv+M/frFAAcu0dvktDkIZ7yWjKz2YRIJYZgOOc5 qQXjy2fk7ghq0hnjg6Pm3WaSEnI4oW15+Mm+i16X6qry3P9o2hvePezzza4a53jO1TWtaH H64661Ztm4Vhp5XEHetwcA2cFYtagtKEDikJgISJoLWZuqhwM9nNH1vO8XVw X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: i197146af:Fastmail Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Fri, 14 Aug 2026 03:27:50 -0400 (EDT) Received: by mail (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTPSA id c818eb32 (TLSv1.3:TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256:NO); Fri, 14 Aug 2026 07:27:47 +0000 (UTC) Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2026 09:27:44 +0200 From: Patrick Steinhardt To: Taylor Blau Cc: Taylor Blau , git@vger.kernel.org, Junio C Hamano , Jeff King , Elijah Newren , SZEDER =?utf-8?B?R8OhYm9y?= Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] midx: pass custom '--base' through incremental writes Message-ID: References: <4115ee0a9a09351e47d557a1283fc6ec4d633304.1781294771.git.me@ttaylorr.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Thu, Aug 13, 2026 at 03:30:53PM -0500, Taylor Blau wrote: > On Thu, Aug 13, 2026 at 10:49:00AM +0200, Patrick Steinhardt wrote: > > > @@ -128,19 +128,33 @@ test_expect_success 'write MIDX layer with --base=none and --no-write-chain-file > > > --no-write-chain-file --base=none)" && > > > > > > test_cmp "$midx_chain.bak" "$midx_chain" && > > > - test_path_is_file "$midxdir/multi-pack-index-$layer.midx" > > > + test_path_is_file "$midxdir/multi-pack-index-$layer.midx" && > > > + > > > + echo "$layer" >"$midx_chain" && > > > + test-tool read-midx --show-objects "$objdir" "$layer" >midx.objects && > > > + test_grep "^$(git rev-parse 2.2) " midx.objects && > > > + cp "$midx_chain.bak" "$midx_chain" > > > ' > > > > Would it make sense to also test for an object from the first MIDX layer > > to be included? Otherwise we don't really assert that all layers are > > included in the new MIDX. > > I don't think that is necessary in this case, but let me know if I am > missing something below. > > The new layer is written with '--bitmap', and '--base=none' means that > there is no base layer from which the bitmap can inherit objects. Since > 1.2 is an ancestor of 2.2, writing a bitmap for the new layer already > requires that it contain 1.2 and the rest of its reachable history. > Otherwise bitmap generation would fail with the missing-closure error > before we reached the assertion. > > Checking 2.2 confirms that an object from the old tip was pulled into > the new layer; the successful bitmap write already establishes that its > objects from the earlier layer were pulled in, too. I think that's a bit roundabout, as it simply tells us that the bitmap was generated correctly, but not that the MIDX contains the objects. It of course should if the bitmap was generated properly, but I would have preferred if we verified the property directly. Anyway, this is not a huge concern, more of a nitpick. Thanks! Patrick