From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.7 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 91721C4338F for ; Fri, 6 Aug 2021 11:16:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 54133611B0 for ; Fri, 6 Aug 2021 11:16:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S245382AbhHFLRA (ORCPT ); Fri, 6 Aug 2021 07:17:00 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:42392 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S235696AbhHFLQ7 (ORCPT ); Fri, 6 Aug 2021 07:16:59 -0400 Received: from mail-pj1-x1030.google.com (mail-pj1-x1030.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::1030]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 26E6EC061798 for ; Fri, 6 Aug 2021 04:16:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pj1-x1030.google.com with SMTP id s22-20020a17090a1c16b0290177caeba067so22294503pjs.0 for ; Fri, 06 Aug 2021 04:16:44 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=references:user-agent:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:message-id :date:mime-version; bh=z/EgcsDVBi9YIV0NAfwjLsU/2pRkdrNRQ5NtQl+mttw=; b=AaK48eY20QB89BaG7KzqAQscDGfFbxyVfJ42fxV2UNtMhSzwDKUbziE6uWNq8AQrqP sCO7hjsPaxymXipoxKe83jXReDA3fEQBgMsAQsSbDXE8K7sR0b5rD77mGQMvfo7ejFu7 7B2csqpy+pv8lP3qB/wxt6tLiPJNBiF9YM7yN3HyQUrR4N5qHou1qC7E02Ga9vdIthHE UnTYuUdoku2eHh4pahdPPopborfsVgcCMnbC1MELYMWrYNvq09qxHpfHQ3Lepbqh7Nl6 dLelnC75BMBau4IuAqTzsyyDD3QCOokWSWK65MCYeZH4n9MwhmBpzBpOse7/UEozSGeD NgpA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:references:user-agent:from:to:cc:subject :in-reply-to:message-id:date:mime-version; bh=z/EgcsDVBi9YIV0NAfwjLsU/2pRkdrNRQ5NtQl+mttw=; b=uT+UAFmosJE8nj99jWW5Y1INGxO+yQq8PFVqzeifwxSdt5zQuX2WwxbDxlaaqK9F/g Q08pmPlJ7siblW8xFc0O23FF5A415OLYtU7JwTn1IUQecGjZ5TptA0YwY+g6nqG3YShy JrjinEeipKlaOQCe6hV2oPpyIH12OEz9p+8VpiaDQuQM9CzoPaYebVOcvjp+NGrbq0/t kgSlB45/QsZJNFSq/QT221uDs97c49jbTNv5Mh7lS1vikfGaCVyusS9gUuHmpi3qkNd5 8rQ+UcsLUzjglnZfPSnVL814NHQPJUzDKkYZnhaADILIiyO29zMuTluwK86zMz8Ni/pA 0Zgg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531dyZywol7vncLHhQj6b5mSpp+QbTiGGGtE2K6Sdw19L/c26maa 6CopVu7mKR2ryNjWVvOpt7c= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzCflgMu4TCmqcZZJM596qg3ebnv0OvXjIT2S/Hbv6qFGbjxcHAImr9+cYy/1n0D4dGHVbNjg== X-Received: by 2002:a63:4c0e:: with SMTP id z14mr287712pga.427.1628248603332; Fri, 06 Aug 2021 04:16:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from atharva-on-air ([119.82.121.47]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id o10sm8039853pjg.34.2021.08.06.04.16.39 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Fri, 06 Aug 2021 04:16:43 -0700 (PDT) References: <20210805071917.29500-1-raykar.ath@gmail.com> <20210805074054.29916-1-raykar.ath@gmail.com> <20210805074054.29916-6-raykar.ath@gmail.com> User-agent: mu4e 1.4.15; emacs 27.2 From: Atharva Raykar To: Junio C Hamano Cc: avarab@gmail.com, christian.couder@gmail.com, congdanhqx@gmail.com, emilyshaffer@google.com, git@vger.kernel.org, jrnieder@gmail.com, kaartic.sivaraam@gmail.com, pc44800@gmail.com, periperidip@gmail.com, rafaeloliveira.cs@gmail.com, sunshine@sunshineco.com Subject: Re: [GSoC] [PATCH v2 5/9] submodule--helper: remove constness of sm_path In-reply-to: Message-ID: Date: Fri, 06 Aug 2021 16:46:37 +0530 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Junio C Hamano writes: > Atharva Raykar writes: > >> This is needed so that it can be modified by normalize_path_copy() in >> the next patch. > > This is a hard-to-judge change. With this alone, we cannot tell if > somebody has already looked at the member (and possibly saved the > pointer elsewhere) before "the next patch" starts modifying the > member in the struct. It probably should be done in a single patch > to demonstrate why it is needed and how existing users of the field > are OK with this change. Okay, I will move this to the next patch.