* Re: [PATCH 2/2] worktree.c: use submodule interface to access refs from another worktree
From: Michael Haggerty @ 2017-02-09 14:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Duy Nguyen; +Cc: Git Mailing List, Junio C Hamano, Stefan Beller
In-Reply-To: <CACsJy8Diy92CNbJ1OBn893VFFrSsxBFWSyQHjt_Dzq9x7jfibQ@mail.gmail.com>
On 02/09/2017 12:59 PM, Duy Nguyen wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 1:07 PM, Michael Haggerty <mhagger@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
>> It is unquestionably a good goal to avoid parsing references outside of
>> `refs/files-backend.c`. But I'm not a fan of this approach.
>
> Yes. But in this context it was more of a guinea pig. I wanted
> something simple enough to code up show we can see what the approach
> looked like. Good thing I did it.
>
>>
>> There are two meanings of the concept of a "ref store", and I think this
>> change muddles them:
>>
>> 1. The references that happen to be *physically* stored in a particular
>> location, for example the `refs/bisect/*` references in a worktree.
>>
>> 2. The references that *logically* should be considered part of a
>> particular repository. This might require stitching together
>> references from multiple sources, for example `HEAD` and
>> `refs/bisect` from a worktree's own directory with other
>> references from the main repository.
>>
>> Either of these concepts can be implemented via the `ref_store` abstraction.
>>
>> The `ref_store` for a submodule should represent the references
>> logically visible from the submodule. The main program shouldn't care
>> whether the references are stored in a single physical location or
>> spread across multiple locations (for example, if the submodule were
>> itself a linked worktree).
>>
>> The `ref_store` that you want here for a worktree is not the worktree's
>> *logical* `ref_store`. You want the worktree's *physical* `ref_store`.
>
> Yep.
>
>> Mixing logical and physical reference stores together is a bad idea
>> (even if we were willing to ignore the fact that worktrees are not
>> submodules in the accepted sense of the word).
>>
>> ...
>>
>> I think the best solution would be to expose the concept of `ref_store`
>> in the public refs API. Then users of submodules would essentially do
>>
>> struct ref_store *refs = get_submodule_refs(submodule_path);
>> ... resolve_ref_recursively(refs, refname, 0, sha1, &flags) ...
>> ... for_each_ref(refs, fn, cb_data) ...
>>
>> whereas for a worktree you'd have to look up the `ref_store` instance
>> somewhere else (or maybe keep it as part of some worktree structure, if
>> there is one) but you would use it via the same API.
>
> Oh I was going to reply to Stefan about his comment to my (**)
> footnote. Something along the this line
>
> "Ideally we would introduce a new set of api, maybe with refs_ prefix,
> that takes a refs_store. Then submodule people can get a ref store
> somewhere and pass to it. Worktree people get maybe some other refs
> store for it. The "old" api like for_each_ref() is a thin wrapper
> around it, just like read_cache() vs read_index(&the_index). If the
> *_submodule does not see much use, we might as well kill it and use
> the generic refs_*".
>
> If I didn't misunderstood anything else, then I think we're on the same page.
>
> Now I need to see if I can get there in a reasonable time frame (so I
> can fix my "gc in worktree" problem properly) or I would need
> something temporary but not so hacky. I'll try to make this new api
> and see how it works out. If you think I should not do it right away,
> for whatever reason, stop me now.
Sounds good. A couple of hints and points to remember:
* I think `struct ref_store *` should remain opaque outside of the refs
code.
* The virtual function interface embodied in `struct ref_storage_be`
isn't meant to be an external interface (i.e., don't just expose it
and have external callers use it directly).
* One important distinction between the main reference store and
submodule reference stores is that we know the object store for
the former but not the latter. That implies that some operations
are, or should be, impossible for submodules (e.g., anything that
involves looking up objects, including peeling refs). However, we
*do* know the object store for linked worktrees. So they don't have
to be as dumbed-down as submodule ref stores. (This might be
irrelevant if you don't need any additional features for your
current purposes.)
Also, I just sent my submodule-hash patch series to the mailing list in
case you want to build on that.
Michael
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: Fwd: Possibly nicer pathspec syntax?
From: Duy Nguyen @ 2017-02-09 13:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Junio C Hamano; +Cc: Linus Torvalds, Git Mailing List
In-Reply-To: <xmqqwpd0v15j.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com>
On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 4:11 AM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
> With or without the patch in this thread, parse_pathspec() behaves
> the same way for either CWD or FULL if you feed a non-empty
> pathspec with at least one positive element. IOW, if a caller feeds
> a non-empty pathspec and there is no "negative" element involved, it
> does not matter if we feed CWD or FULL.
Yes. Now that you put it that way, it may make more sense to rename
the options to PATHSPEC_DEFAULT_* instead of PATHSPEC_PREFER_*.
> - builtin/checkout.c::cmd_checkout(), when argc==0, does not call
> parse_pathspec(). This codepath will get affected by Linus's
> change ("cd t && git checkout :\!perf" would try to check out
> everything except t/perf, but what is a reasonable definition of
> "everything" in the context of this command). We need to
> decide, and I am leaning towards preferring CWD for this case.
So far I have seen arguments with single negative pathspec as
examples. What about "cd t; git checkout :^perf :^../Documentation"?
CWD is probably not the best base to be excluded from. Maybe the
common prefix of all negative pathspecs? But things start to get a bit
unintuitive on that road. Or do will still bail out on multiple
negative pathspecs with no positive one?
Also, even with single negative pathspec, what about "cd t; git
checkout :^../ewah"?
> So, I am tempted to suggest us doing the following:
>
> * Leave a NEEDSWORK comment to archive.c::path_exists() that is
> used for checking the validation of pathspec elements. To fix it
> properly, we need to be able to skip a negative pathspec to be
> passed to this function by the caller, and to do so, we need to
> expose a helper from the pathspec API that gets a single string
> and returns what magic it has, but that is of lower priority.
Side note. There's something else I'm not happy with pathspec handling
in "git archive". Try "cd t; git archive HEAD -- ../Documentation" and
you'll get a very unfriendly error message. But well, no time for it.
> * Retire the PATHSPEC_PREFER_CWD bit and replace its use with the
> lack of the PATHSPEC_PREFER_FULL bit.
>
> * Keep most of the above callsites that currently do not pass
> CWD/FULL as they are, except the ones that should take FULL (see
> above).
>
> Comments?
This comes from my experience reading files-backend.c. I didn't
realize '0' in files_downcast(ref_store, 0, "pack_refs"); meant
'submodule not allowed' because apparently I was too lazy to read
prototype. But if was files_downcast(ref_store, NO_SUBMODULE,
"pack_refs"), it would save people's time.
With that in mind, should we keep _CWD the name, so people can quickly
see and guess that it prefers _CWD than _FULL? _CWD can be defined as
zero. It there's mostly as a friendly reminder.
Other than that, yes if killing one flag helps maintenance, I'm for it.
PS. You may notice I favored ^ over ! already. ! was a pain point for
me too but I was too lazy to bring it up and fight for it. Thanks
Linus.
--
Duy
^ permalink raw reply
* [PATCH 2/5] refs: push the submodule attribute down
From: Michael Haggerty @ 2017-02-09 13:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Junio C Hamano
Cc: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy, Stefan Beller,
Johannes Schindelin, David Turner, git, Michael Haggerty
In-Reply-To: <cover.1486629195.git.mhagger@alum.mit.edu>
Push the submodule attribute down from ref_store to files_ref_store.
This is another step towards loosening the 1:1 connection between
ref_stores and submodules.
Signed-off-by: Michael Haggerty <mhagger@alum.mit.edu>
---
refs.c | 9 --------
refs/files-backend.c | 61 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------
refs/refs-internal.h | 13 -----------
3 files changed, 43 insertions(+), 40 deletions(-)
diff --git a/refs.c b/refs.c
index 50d192c..723b4be 100644
--- a/refs.c
+++ b/refs.c
@@ -1404,11 +1404,8 @@ void base_ref_store_init(struct ref_store *refs,
if (main_ref_store)
die("BUG: main_ref_store initialized twice");
- refs->submodule = "";
main_ref_store = refs;
} else {
- refs->submodule = xstrdup(submodule);
-
if (!submodule_ref_stores.tablesize)
hashmap_init(&submodule_ref_stores, submodule_hash_cmp, 20);
@@ -1473,12 +1470,6 @@ struct ref_store *get_ref_store(const char *submodule)
return refs;
}
-void assert_main_repository(struct ref_store *refs, const char *caller)
-{
- if (*refs->submodule)
- die("BUG: %s called for a submodule", caller);
-}
-
/* backend functions */
int pack_refs(unsigned int flags)
{
diff --git a/refs/files-backend.c b/refs/files-backend.c
index c041d4b..6ed7e13 100644
--- a/refs/files-backend.c
+++ b/refs/files-backend.c
@@ -912,6 +912,14 @@ struct packed_ref_cache {
*/
struct files_ref_store {
struct ref_store base;
+
+ /*
+ * The name of the submodule represented by this object, or
+ * the empty string if it represents the main repository's
+ * reference store:
+ */
+ const char *submodule;
+
struct ref_entry *loose;
struct packed_ref_cache *packed;
};
@@ -974,10 +982,23 @@ static struct ref_store *files_ref_store_create(const char *submodule)
base_ref_store_init(ref_store, &refs_be_files, submodule);
+ refs->submodule = submodule ? xstrdup(submodule) : "";
+
return ref_store;
}
/*
+ * Die if refs is for a submodule (i.e., not for the main repository).
+ * caller is used in any necessary error messages.
+ */
+static void files_assert_main_repository(struct files_ref_store *refs,
+ const char *caller)
+{
+ if (*refs->submodule)
+ die("BUG: %s called for a submodule", caller);
+}
+
+/*
* Downcast ref_store to files_ref_store. Die if ref_store is not a
* files_ref_store. If submodule_allowed is not true, then also die if
* files_ref_store is for a submodule (i.e., not for the main
@@ -987,14 +1008,18 @@ static struct files_ref_store *files_downcast(
struct ref_store *ref_store, int submodule_allowed,
const char *caller)
{
+ struct files_ref_store *refs;
+
if (ref_store->be != &refs_be_files)
die("BUG: ref_store is type \"%s\" not \"files\" in %s",
ref_store->be->name, caller);
+ refs = (struct files_ref_store *)ref_store;
+
if (!submodule_allowed)
- assert_main_repository(ref_store, caller);
+ files_assert_main_repository(refs, caller);
- return (struct files_ref_store *)ref_store;
+ return refs;
}
/* The length of a peeled reference line in packed-refs, including EOL: */
@@ -1133,8 +1158,8 @@ static struct packed_ref_cache *get_packed_ref_cache(struct files_ref_store *ref
{
char *packed_refs_file;
- if (*refs->base.submodule)
- packed_refs_file = git_pathdup_submodule(refs->base.submodule,
+ if (*refs->submodule)
+ packed_refs_file = git_pathdup_submodule(refs->submodule,
"packed-refs");
else
packed_refs_file = git_pathdup("packed-refs");
@@ -1203,8 +1228,8 @@ static void read_loose_refs(const char *dirname, struct ref_dir *dir)
size_t path_baselen;
int err = 0;
- if (*refs->base.submodule)
- err = strbuf_git_path_submodule(&path, refs->base.submodule, "%s", dirname);
+ if (*refs->submodule)
+ err = strbuf_git_path_submodule(&path, refs->submodule, "%s", dirname);
else
strbuf_git_path(&path, "%s", dirname);
path_baselen = path.len;
@@ -1244,10 +1269,10 @@ static void read_loose_refs(const char *dirname, struct ref_dir *dir)
} else {
int read_ok;
- if (*refs->base.submodule) {
+ if (*refs->submodule) {
hashclr(sha1);
flag = 0;
- read_ok = !resolve_gitlink_ref(refs->base.submodule,
+ read_ok = !resolve_gitlink_ref(refs->submodule,
refname.buf, sha1);
} else {
read_ok = !read_ref_full(refname.buf,
@@ -1358,8 +1383,8 @@ static int files_read_raw_ref(struct ref_store *ref_store,
*type = 0;
strbuf_reset(&sb_path);
- if (*refs->base.submodule)
- strbuf_git_path_submodule(&sb_path, refs->base.submodule, "%s", refname);
+ if (*refs->submodule)
+ strbuf_git_path_submodule(&sb_path, refs->submodule, "%s", refname);
else
strbuf_git_path(&sb_path, "%s", refname);
@@ -1540,7 +1565,7 @@ static int lock_raw_ref(struct files_ref_store *refs,
int ret = TRANSACTION_GENERIC_ERROR;
assert(err);
- assert_main_repository(&refs->base, "lock_raw_ref");
+ files_assert_main_repository(refs, "lock_raw_ref");
*type = 0;
@@ -2006,7 +2031,7 @@ static struct ref_lock *lock_ref_sha1_basic(struct files_ref_store *refs,
int attempts_remaining = 3;
int resolved;
- assert_main_repository(&refs->base, "lock_ref_sha1_basic");
+ files_assert_main_repository(refs, "lock_ref_sha1_basic");
assert(err);
lock = xcalloc(1, sizeof(struct ref_lock));
@@ -2152,7 +2177,7 @@ static int lock_packed_refs(struct files_ref_store *refs, int flags)
static int timeout_value = 1000;
struct packed_ref_cache *packed_ref_cache;
- assert_main_repository(&refs->base, "lock_packed_refs");
+ files_assert_main_repository(refs, "lock_packed_refs");
if (!timeout_configured) {
git_config_get_int("core.packedrefstimeout", &timeout_value);
@@ -2190,7 +2215,7 @@ static int commit_packed_refs(struct files_ref_store *refs)
int save_errno = 0;
FILE *out;
- assert_main_repository(&refs->base, "commit_packed_refs");
+ files_assert_main_repository(refs, "commit_packed_refs");
if (!packed_ref_cache->lock)
die("internal error: packed-refs not locked");
@@ -2223,7 +2248,7 @@ static void rollback_packed_refs(struct files_ref_store *refs)
struct packed_ref_cache *packed_ref_cache =
get_packed_ref_cache(refs);
- assert_main_repository(&refs->base, "rollback_packed_refs");
+ files_assert_main_repository(refs, "rollback_packed_refs");
if (!packed_ref_cache->lock)
die("internal error: packed-refs not locked");
@@ -2397,7 +2422,7 @@ static int repack_without_refs(struct files_ref_store *refs,
struct string_list_item *refname;
int ret, needs_repacking = 0, removed = 0;
- assert_main_repository(&refs->base, "repack_without_refs");
+ files_assert_main_repository(refs, "repack_without_refs");
assert(err);
/* Look for a packed ref */
@@ -2930,7 +2955,7 @@ static int commit_ref_update(struct files_ref_store *refs,
const unsigned char *sha1, const char *logmsg,
struct strbuf *err)
{
- assert_main_repository(&refs->base, "commit_ref_update");
+ files_assert_main_repository(refs, "commit_ref_update");
clear_loose_ref_cache(refs);
if (log_ref_write(lock->ref_name, lock->old_oid.hash, sha1, logmsg, 0, err)) {
@@ -3560,7 +3585,7 @@ static int lock_ref_for_update(struct files_ref_store *refs,
int ret;
struct ref_lock *lock;
- assert_main_repository(&refs->base, "lock_ref_for_update");
+ files_assert_main_repository(refs, "lock_ref_for_update");
if ((update->flags & REF_HAVE_NEW) && is_null_sha1(update->new_sha1))
update->flags |= REF_DELETING;
diff --git a/refs/refs-internal.h b/refs/refs-internal.h
index 4ed5f89..97f275b 100644
--- a/refs/refs-internal.h
+++ b/refs/refs-internal.h
@@ -627,13 +627,6 @@ extern struct ref_storage_be refs_be_files;
struct ref_store {
/* The backend describing this ref_store's storage scheme: */
const struct ref_storage_be *be;
-
- /*
- * The name of the submodule represented by this object, or
- * the empty string if it represents the main repository's
- * reference store:
- */
- const char *submodule;
};
/*
@@ -675,10 +668,4 @@ struct ref_store *lookup_ref_store(const char *submodule);
*/
struct ref_store *get_ref_store(const char *submodule);
-/*
- * Die if refs is for a submodule (i.e., not for the main repository).
- * caller is used in any necessary error messages.
- */
-void assert_main_repository(struct ref_store *refs, const char *caller);
-
#endif /* REFS_REFS_INTERNAL_H */
--
2.9.3
^ permalink raw reply related
* [PATCH 5/5] read_loose_refs(): read refs using resolve_ref_recursively()
From: Michael Haggerty @ 2017-02-09 13:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Junio C Hamano
Cc: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy, Stefan Beller,
Johannes Schindelin, David Turner, git, Michael Haggerty
In-Reply-To: <cover.1486629195.git.mhagger@alum.mit.edu>
There is no need to call read_ref_full() or resolve_gitlink_ref() from
read_loose_refs(), because we already have a ref_store object in hand.
So we can call resolve_ref_recursively() ourselves. Happily, this
unifies the code for the submodule vs. non-submodule cases.
This requires resolve_ref_recursively() to be exposed to the refs
subsystem, though not to non-refs code.
Signed-off-by: Michael Haggerty <mhagger@alum.mit.edu>
---
refs.c | 8 ++++----
refs/files-backend.c | 18 ++++--------------
refs/refs-internal.h | 5 +++++
3 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-)
diff --git a/refs.c b/refs.c
index 6012f67..210a453 100644
--- a/refs.c
+++ b/refs.c
@@ -1235,10 +1235,10 @@ int for_each_rawref(each_ref_fn fn, void *cb_data)
}
/* This function needs to return a meaningful errno on failure */
-static const char *resolve_ref_recursively(struct ref_store *refs,
- const char *refname,
- int resolve_flags,
- unsigned char *sha1, int *flags)
+const char *resolve_ref_recursively(struct ref_store *refs,
+ const char *refname,
+ int resolve_flags,
+ unsigned char *sha1, int *flags)
{
static struct strbuf sb_refname = STRBUF_INIT;
int unused_flags;
diff --git a/refs/files-backend.c b/refs/files-backend.c
index 069a8ee..f087a99 100644
--- a/refs/files-backend.c
+++ b/refs/files-backend.c
@@ -1267,20 +1267,10 @@ static void read_loose_refs(const char *dirname, struct ref_dir *dir)
create_dir_entry(refs, refname.buf,
refname.len, 1));
} else {
- int read_ok;
-
- if (refs->submodule) {
- hashclr(sha1);
- flag = 0;
- read_ok = !resolve_gitlink_ref(refs->submodule,
- refname.buf, sha1);
- } else {
- read_ok = !read_ref_full(refname.buf,
- RESOLVE_REF_READING,
- sha1, &flag);
- }
-
- if (!read_ok) {
+ if (!resolve_ref_recursively(&refs->base,
+ refname.buf,
+ RESOLVE_REF_READING,
+ sha1, &flag)) {
hashclr(sha1);
flag |= REF_ISBROKEN;
} else if (is_null_sha1(sha1)) {
diff --git a/refs/refs-internal.h b/refs/refs-internal.h
index 73281f5..af9e5fe 100644
--- a/refs/refs-internal.h
+++ b/refs/refs-internal.h
@@ -673,4 +673,9 @@ struct ref_store *lookup_ref_store(const char *submodule);
*/
struct ref_store *get_ref_store(const char *submodule);
+const char *resolve_ref_recursively(struct ref_store *refs,
+ const char *refname,
+ int resolve_flags,
+ unsigned char *sha1, int *flags);
+
#endif /* REFS_REFS_INTERNAL_H */
--
2.9.3
^ permalink raw reply related
* [PATCH 4/5] files_ref_store::submodule: use NULL for the main repository
From: Michael Haggerty @ 2017-02-09 13:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Junio C Hamano
Cc: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy, Stefan Beller,
Johannes Schindelin, David Turner, git, Michael Haggerty
In-Reply-To: <cover.1486629195.git.mhagger@alum.mit.edu>
The old practice of storing the empty string in this member for the main
repository was a holdover from before 00eebe3 (refs: create a base class
"ref_store" for files_ref_store, 2016-09-04), when the submodule was
stored in a flex array at the end of `struct files_ref_store`. Storing
NULL for this case is more idiomatic and a tiny bit less code.
Signed-off-by: Michael Haggerty <mhagger@alum.mit.edu>
---
refs/files-backend.c | 16 ++++++++--------
1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
diff --git a/refs/files-backend.c b/refs/files-backend.c
index 794b88c..069a8ee 100644
--- a/refs/files-backend.c
+++ b/refs/files-backend.c
@@ -915,8 +915,8 @@ struct files_ref_store {
/*
* The name of the submodule represented by this object, or
- * the empty string if it represents the main repository's
- * reference store:
+ * NULL if it represents the main repository's reference
+ * store:
*/
const char *submodule;
@@ -982,7 +982,7 @@ static struct ref_store *files_ref_store_create(const char *submodule)
base_ref_store_init(ref_store, &refs_be_files);
- refs->submodule = submodule ? xstrdup(submodule) : "";
+ refs->submodule = xstrdup_or_null(submodule);
return ref_store;
}
@@ -994,7 +994,7 @@ static struct ref_store *files_ref_store_create(const char *submodule)
static void files_assert_main_repository(struct files_ref_store *refs,
const char *caller)
{
- if (*refs->submodule)
+ if (refs->submodule)
die("BUG: %s called for a submodule", caller);
}
@@ -1158,7 +1158,7 @@ static struct packed_ref_cache *get_packed_ref_cache(struct files_ref_store *ref
{
char *packed_refs_file;
- if (*refs->submodule)
+ if (refs->submodule)
packed_refs_file = git_pathdup_submodule(refs->submodule,
"packed-refs");
else
@@ -1228,7 +1228,7 @@ static void read_loose_refs(const char *dirname, struct ref_dir *dir)
size_t path_baselen;
int err = 0;
- if (*refs->submodule)
+ if (refs->submodule)
err = strbuf_git_path_submodule(&path, refs->submodule, "%s", dirname);
else
strbuf_git_path(&path, "%s", dirname);
@@ -1269,7 +1269,7 @@ static void read_loose_refs(const char *dirname, struct ref_dir *dir)
} else {
int read_ok;
- if (*refs->submodule) {
+ if (refs->submodule) {
hashclr(sha1);
flag = 0;
read_ok = !resolve_gitlink_ref(refs->submodule,
@@ -1383,7 +1383,7 @@ static int files_read_raw_ref(struct ref_store *ref_store,
*type = 0;
strbuf_reset(&sb_path);
- if (*refs->submodule)
+ if (refs->submodule)
strbuf_git_path_submodule(&sb_path, refs->submodule, "%s", refname);
else
strbuf_git_path(&sb_path, "%s", refname);
--
2.9.3
^ permalink raw reply related
* [PATCH 1/5] refs: store submodule ref stores in a hashmap
From: Michael Haggerty @ 2017-02-09 13:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Junio C Hamano
Cc: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy, Stefan Beller,
Johannes Schindelin, David Turner, git, Michael Haggerty
In-Reply-To: <cover.1486629195.git.mhagger@alum.mit.edu>
Aside from scaling better, this means that the submodule name needn't be
stored in the ref_store instance anymore (which will be changed in a
moment). This, in turn, will help loosen the strict 1:1 relationship
between ref_stores and submodules.
Signed-off-by: Michael Haggerty <mhagger@alum.mit.edu>
---
refs.c | 61 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------
refs/refs-internal.h | 6 ------
2 files changed, 47 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
diff --git a/refs.c b/refs.c
index cd36b64..50d192c 100644
--- a/refs.c
+++ b/refs.c
@@ -3,6 +3,7 @@
*/
#include "cache.h"
+#include "hashmap.h"
#include "lockfile.h"
#include "refs.h"
#include "refs/refs-internal.h"
@@ -1357,11 +1358,42 @@ int resolve_gitlink_ref(const char *submodule, const char *refname,
return 0;
}
+struct submodule_hash_entry
+{
+ struct hashmap_entry ent; /* must be the first member! */
+
+ struct ref_store *refs;
+
+ /* NUL-terminated name of submodule: */
+ char submodule[FLEX_ARRAY];
+};
+
+static int submodule_hash_cmp(const void *entry, const void *entry_or_key,
+ const void *keydata)
+{
+ const struct submodule_hash_entry *e1 = entry, *e2 = entry_or_key;
+ const char *submodule = keydata;
+
+ return strcmp(e1->submodule, submodule ? submodule : e2->submodule);
+}
+
+static struct submodule_hash_entry *alloc_submodule_hash_entry(
+ const char *submodule, struct ref_store *refs)
+{
+ size_t len = strlen(submodule);
+ struct submodule_hash_entry *entry = malloc(sizeof(*entry) + len + 1);
+
+ hashmap_entry_init(entry, strhash(submodule));
+ entry->refs = refs;
+ memcpy(entry->submodule, submodule, len + 1);
+ return entry;
+}
+
/* A pointer to the ref_store for the main repository: */
static struct ref_store *main_ref_store;
-/* A linked list of ref_stores for submodules: */
-static struct ref_store *submodule_ref_stores;
+/* A hashmap of ref_stores, stored by submodule name: */
+static struct hashmap submodule_ref_stores;
void base_ref_store_init(struct ref_store *refs,
const struct ref_storage_be *be,
@@ -1373,16 +1405,17 @@ void base_ref_store_init(struct ref_store *refs,
die("BUG: main_ref_store initialized twice");
refs->submodule = "";
- refs->next = NULL;
main_ref_store = refs;
} else {
- if (lookup_ref_store(submodule))
+ refs->submodule = xstrdup(submodule);
+
+ if (!submodule_ref_stores.tablesize)
+ hashmap_init(&submodule_ref_stores, submodule_hash_cmp, 20);
+
+ if (hashmap_put(&submodule_ref_stores,
+ alloc_submodule_hash_entry(submodule, refs)))
die("BUG: ref_store for submodule '%s' initialized twice",
submodule);
-
- refs->submodule = xstrdup(submodule);
- refs->next = submodule_ref_stores;
- submodule_ref_stores = refs;
}
}
@@ -1402,17 +1435,17 @@ struct ref_store *ref_store_init(const char *submodule)
struct ref_store *lookup_ref_store(const char *submodule)
{
- struct ref_store *refs;
+ struct submodule_hash_entry *entry;
if (!submodule || !*submodule)
return main_ref_store;
- for (refs = submodule_ref_stores; refs; refs = refs->next) {
- if (!strcmp(submodule, refs->submodule))
- return refs;
- }
+ if (!submodule_ref_stores.tablesize)
+ hashmap_init(&submodule_ref_stores, submodule_hash_cmp, 20);
- return NULL;
+ entry = hashmap_get_from_hash(&submodule_ref_stores,
+ strhash(submodule), submodule);
+ return entry ? entry->refs : NULL;
}
struct ref_store *get_ref_store(const char *submodule)
diff --git a/refs/refs-internal.h b/refs/refs-internal.h
index 25444cf..4ed5f89 100644
--- a/refs/refs-internal.h
+++ b/refs/refs-internal.h
@@ -634,12 +634,6 @@ struct ref_store {
* reference store:
*/
const char *submodule;
-
- /*
- * Submodule reference store instances are stored in a linked
- * list using this pointer.
- */
- struct ref_store *next;
};
/*
--
2.9.3
^ permalink raw reply related
* [PATCH 3/5] register_ref_store(): new function
From: Michael Haggerty @ 2017-02-09 13:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Junio C Hamano
Cc: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy, Stefan Beller,
Johannes Schindelin, David Turner, git, Michael Haggerty
In-Reply-To: <cover.1486629195.git.mhagger@alum.mit.edu>
Move the responsibility for registering the ref_store for a submodule
from base_ref_store_init() to a new function, register_ref_store(). Call
the latter from ref_store_init().
This means that base_ref_store_init() can lose its submodule argument,
further weakening the 1:1 relationship between ref_stores and
submodules.
Signed-off-by: Michael Haggerty <mhagger@alum.mit.edu>
---
refs.c | 19 +++++++++++++------
refs/files-backend.c | 2 +-
refs/refs-internal.h | 15 ++++++++++-----
3 files changed, 24 insertions(+), 12 deletions(-)
diff --git a/refs.c b/refs.c
index 723b4be..6012f67 100644
--- a/refs.c
+++ b/refs.c
@@ -1395,11 +1395,8 @@ static struct ref_store *main_ref_store;
/* A hashmap of ref_stores, stored by submodule name: */
static struct hashmap submodule_ref_stores;
-void base_ref_store_init(struct ref_store *refs,
- const struct ref_storage_be *be,
- const char *submodule)
+void register_ref_store(struct ref_store *refs, const char *submodule)
{
- refs->be = be;
if (!submodule) {
if (main_ref_store)
die("BUG: main_ref_store initialized twice");
@@ -1416,18 +1413,28 @@ void base_ref_store_init(struct ref_store *refs,
}
}
+void base_ref_store_init(struct ref_store *refs,
+ const struct ref_storage_be *be)
+{
+ refs->be = be;
+}
+
struct ref_store *ref_store_init(const char *submodule)
{
const char *be_name = "files";
struct ref_storage_be *be = find_ref_storage_backend(be_name);
+ struct ref_store *refs;
if (!be)
die("BUG: reference backend %s is unknown", be_name);
if (!submodule || !*submodule)
- return be->init(NULL);
+ refs = be->init(NULL);
else
- return be->init(submodule);
+ refs = be->init(submodule);
+
+ register_ref_store(refs, submodule);
+ return refs;
}
struct ref_store *lookup_ref_store(const char *submodule)
diff --git a/refs/files-backend.c b/refs/files-backend.c
index 6ed7e13..794b88c 100644
--- a/refs/files-backend.c
+++ b/refs/files-backend.c
@@ -980,7 +980,7 @@ static struct ref_store *files_ref_store_create(const char *submodule)
struct files_ref_store *refs = xcalloc(1, sizeof(*refs));
struct ref_store *ref_store = (struct ref_store *)refs;
- base_ref_store_init(ref_store, &refs_be_files, submodule);
+ base_ref_store_init(ref_store, &refs_be_files);
refs->submodule = submodule ? xstrdup(submodule) : "";
diff --git a/refs/refs-internal.h b/refs/refs-internal.h
index 97f275b..73281f5 100644
--- a/refs/refs-internal.h
+++ b/refs/refs-internal.h
@@ -481,7 +481,7 @@ struct ref_store;
* Initialize the ref_store for the specified submodule, or for the
* main repository if submodule == NULL. These functions should call
* base_ref_store_init() to initialize the shared part of the
- * ref_store and to record the ref_store for later lookup.
+ * ref_store.
*/
typedef struct ref_store *ref_store_init_fn(const char *submodule);
@@ -630,12 +630,17 @@ struct ref_store {
};
/*
- * Fill in the generic part of refs for the specified submodule and
- * add it to our collection of reference stores.
+ * Register the specified ref_store to be the one that should be used
+ * for submodule (or the main repository if submodule is NULL). It is
+ * a fatal error to call this function twice for the same submodule.
+ */
+void register_ref_store(struct ref_store *refs, const char *submodule);
+
+/*
+ * Fill in the generic part of refs.
*/
void base_ref_store_init(struct ref_store *refs,
- const struct ref_storage_be *be,
- const char *submodule);
+ const struct ref_storage_be *be);
/*
* Create, record, and return a ref_store instance for the specified
--
2.9.3
^ permalink raw reply related
* Re: Fwd: Possibly nicer pathspec syntax?
From: Duy Nguyen @ 2017-02-09 13:27 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Junio C Hamano; +Cc: Linus Torvalds, Git Mailing List
In-Reply-To: <xmqqy3xgwpiq.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com>
On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 12:39 AM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
> Duy Nguyen <pclouds@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> On Wed, Feb 8, 2017 at 12:12 PM, Linus Torvalds
>> <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
>>> Two-patch series to follow.
>>
>> glossary-content.txt update for both patches would be nice.
>
> I am no longer worried about it as I saw somebody actually sent
> follow-up patches on this, but I want to pick your brain on one
> thing that is related to this codepath.
>
> We have PATHSPEC_PREFER_CWD and PATHSPEC_PREFER_FULL bits in flags,
> added at fc12261fea ("parse_pathspec: add PATHSPEC_PREFER_{CWD,FULL}
> flags", 2013-07-14), and I think the intent is some commands when
> given no pathspec work on all paths in the current subdirectory
> while others work on the full tree, regardless of where you are.
> "grep" is in the former camp, "log" is in the latter. And there is
> a check to catch a bug in a caller that sets both.
>
> I am wondering about this hunk (this is from the original commit
> that added it):
>
> if (!entry) {
> static const char *raw[2];
>
> + if (flags & PATHSPEC_PREFER_FULL)
> + return;
> +
> + if (!(flags & PATHSPEC_PREFER_CWD))
> + die("BUG: PATHSPEC_PREFER_CWD requires arguments");
> +
> pathspec->items = item = xmalloc(sizeof(*item));
> memset(item, 0, sizeof(*item));
> item->match = prefix;
> ... returns a single entry pathspec to cover cwd ...
>
> The BUG message is given when
>
> - The command got no pathspec from the caller; and
> - PATHSPEC_PREFER_FULL is not set; and
> - PATHSPEC_PREFER_CWD is NOT set.
>
> but the message says that the caller must have args when it sets
> prefer-cwd. Is this a simple typo? If so what should it say?
>
> die("BUG: one of PATHSPEC_PREFER_FULL or _CWD must be set");
Without reading through your next mail, I'd say "BUG: this command
requires arguments".
> Does this third possibility (i.e. a caller is allowed to pass
> "flags" that does not prefer either) exist to support a command
> where the caller MUST have at least one pathspec? If that were the
> case, this wouldn't be a BUG but an end-user error, e.g.
>
> die("at least one pathspec element is required");
Or this. Yes. I might have just been defensive at then and kept the
third option open.
> If you know offhand which callers pass neither of the two
> PATHSPEC_PREFER_* bits and remember for what purpose you allowed
> them to do so, please remind me. I'll keep digging in the meantime.
I don't usually remember what I ate yesterday and this commit was from
2013 :D But I'll see if your findings spark anything in my brain.
--
Duy
^ permalink raw reply
* [PATCH 0/5] Store submodules in a hash, not a linked list
From: Michael Haggerty @ 2017-02-09 13:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Junio C Hamano
Cc: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy, Stefan Beller,
Johannes Schindelin, David Turner, git, Michael Haggerty
I have mentioned this patch series on the mailing list a couple of
time [1,2] but haven't submitted it before. I just rebased it to
current master. It is available from my Git fork [3] as branch
"submodule-hash".
The first point of this patch series is to optimize submodule
`ref_store` lookup by storing the `ref_store`s in a hashmap rather
than a linked list. But a more interesting second point is to weaken
the 1:1 relationship between submodules and `ref_stores` a little bit
more.
A `files_ref_store` would be perfectly happy to represent, say, the
references *physically* stored in a linked worktree (e.g., `HEAD`,
`refs/bisect/*`, etc) even though that is not the complete collection
of refs that are *logically* visible from that worktree (which
includes references from the main repository, too). But the old code
was confusing the two things by storing "submodule" in every
`ref_store` instance.
So push the submodule attribute down to the `files_ref_store` class
(but continue to let the `ref_store`s be looked up by submodule).
The last commit is relatively orthogonal to the others; it simplifies
read_loose_refs() by calling resolve_ref_recursively() directly using
the `ref_store` instance that it already has in hand, rather than
indirectly via the public wrappers.
Michael
[1] http://public-inbox.org/git/341999fc-4496-b974-c117-c18a2fca1358@alum.mit.edu/
[2] http://public-inbox.org/git/37fe2024-0378-a974-a28d-18a89d3e2312@alum.mit.edu/
[3] https://github.com/mhagger/git
Michael Haggerty (5):
refs: store submodule ref stores in a hashmap
refs: push the submodule attribute down
register_ref_store(): new function
files_ref_store::submodule: use NULL for the main repository
read_loose_refs(): read refs using resolve_ref_recursively()
refs.c | 93 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------
refs/files-backend.c | 77 +++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------
refs/refs-internal.h | 37 ++++++++-------------
3 files changed, 122 insertions(+), 85 deletions(-)
--
2.9.3
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: What's cooking in git.git (Feb 2017, #02; Mon, 6)
From: Johannes Schindelin @ 2017-02-09 12:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Junio C Hamano; +Cc: git
In-Reply-To: <xmqqzihzymn3.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com>
Hi Junio,
On Mon, 6 Feb 2017, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> * sf/putty-w-args (2017-02-01) 5 commits
> - SQUASH???
> - connect: Add the envvar GIT_SSH_VARIANT and ssh.variant config
> - git_connect(): factor out SSH variant handling
> - connect: rename tortoiseplink and putty variables
> - connect: handle putty/plink also in GIT_SSH_COMMAND
>
> The command line options for ssh invocation needs to be tweaked for
> some implementations of SSH (e.g. PuTTY plink wants "-P <port>"
> while OpenSSH wants "-p <port>" to specify port to connect to), and
> the variant was guessed when GIT_SSH environment variable is used
> to specify it. Extend the guess to the command specified by the
> newer GIT_SSH_COMMAND and also core.sshcommand configuration
> variable, and give an escape hatch for users to deal with
> misdetected cases.
>
> Stalled?
> cf. <alpine.DEB.2.20.1702012319460.3496@virtualbox>
The latest messages in that thread are
- your claim that you never said correctness is pused to a back seat (when
an earlier, detailed mail listed four priorities of your patch review,
none of which is said correctness, so I did not bother to answer), and
- my answer that suggested to take a break because the conversation turned
less rational: I had to point out that your objection was not really
valid in this case.
I now see that you added a SQUASH commit (that was news to me, thank you
very much), and that you seem to still insist that the code should prepare
for possible future changes in the config settings that may actually never
materialize. (And that would have to be handled at a different point, as I
had pointed out, so that suggested preparation would most likely not help
at all.)
In short: unless I read any convincing argument in favor of said SQUASH
commit, I will remain convinced that v3, as submitted, is actually the
best way forward.
Thank you for your attention,
Johannes
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: GSoC 2017: application open, deadline = February 9, 2017
From: Pranit Bauva @ 2017-02-09 12:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jeff King
Cc: Matthieu Moy, git, Lars Schneider, Christian Couder,
Carlos Martín Nieto, Johannes Schindelin, Thomas Gummerer
In-Reply-To: <20170125204504.ebw2sa4uokfwwfnt@sigill.intra.peff.net>
Hey everyone,
On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 2:15 AM, Jeff King <peff@peff.net> wrote:
> I do not mind doing the administrative stuff. But the real work is in
> polishing up the ideas list and microprojects page. So I think the first
> step, if people are interested in GSoC, is not just to say "yes, let's
> do it", but to actually flesh out these pages:
I will help with adding more ideas to the microprojects list. But
since I am not quite familiar with the whole code base, I will need
some help with verifying those whether they are in the scope or not. I
am not sure whether I would be able to help with actual project ideas
but I will try. I will do it within a week or so.
Regards,
Pranit Bauva
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: GSoC 2017: application open, deadline = February 9, 2017
From: Matthieu Moy @ 2017-02-09 12:22 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Christian Couder
Cc: Jeff King, git, Pranit Bauva, Lars Schneider,
Carlos Martín Nieto, Johannes Schindelin, Thomas Gummerer,
Siddharth Kannan
In-Reply-To: <vpqlgtfmun0.fsf@anie.imag.fr>
Matthieu Moy <Matthieu.Moy@grenoble-inp.fr> writes:
> I created a Git organization and invited you + Peff as admins. I'll
> start cut-and-pasting to show my good faith ;-).
I created this page based on last year's:
https://git.github.io/SoC-2017-Org-Application/
I filled-in the "org profile". "Org application" is still TODO.
--
Matthieu Moy
http://www-verimag.imag.fr/~moy/
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: GSoC 2017: application open, deadline = February 9, 2017
From: Matthieu Moy @ 2017-02-09 12:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Christian Couder
Cc: Jeff King, git, Pranit Bauva, Lars Schneider,
Carlos Martín Nieto, Johannes Schindelin, Thomas Gummerer,
Siddharth Kannan
In-Reply-To: <CAP8UFD1V=WD-EHkBkAVET9ztvsHZr_S5GVBWrQ6F1e0LwJoksQ@mail.gmail.com>
Christian Couder <christian.couder@gmail.com> writes:
> Well Peff wrote in reply to your email:
>
>> I did co-admin last year and the year before, but I made Matthieu do all
>> the work. :)
>>
>> I do not mind doing the administrative stuff. But the real work is in
>> polishing up the ideas list and microprojects page.
>
> So I thought Peff would be ok to be the admin (do "the administrative
> stuff").
There are several things the admins need to do:
1) "administrative stuff" about money with Conservancy (aka SFC). As I
understand it, really not much to do since Google and Conservancy
work directly with each other for most stuff.
2) Filling-in the application, i.e. essentially copy-past from the
website.
3) Then, make sure things that must happen do happen (reviewing
applications, start online or offline discussions when needed, ...).
Last year Peff did 1) and I did most of 2+3). My understanding of Peff's
reply was "OK to continue doing 1)".
I think you (Christian) could do 2+3). It's much, much less work than
being a mentor. Honnestly I felt like I did nothing and then Peff said I
did all the work :o). I can help, but as I said I'm really short in time
budget and I'd like to spend it more on coding+reviewing.
> I don't think emails in this thread is what really counts.
> I worked on the Idea page starting some months ago, and as I wrote I
> reviewed it again and found it not too bad.
OK, so giving up now seems unfair to you indeed.
I created a Git organization and invited you + Peff as admins. I'll
start cut-and-pasting to show my good faith ;-).
> About the janitoring part, as I previously said I am reluctant to do
> that as I don't know what Dscho would be ok to mentor.
> And I also think it's not absolutely necessary to do it before
> applying as an org.
Right.
--
Matthieu Moy
http://www-verimag.imag.fr/~moy/
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: [PATCH 2/2] worktree.c: use submodule interface to access refs from another worktree
From: Duy Nguyen @ 2017-02-09 11:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Michael Haggerty; +Cc: Git Mailing List, Junio C Hamano, Stefan Beller
In-Reply-To: <37fe2024-0378-a974-a28d-18a89d3e2312@alum.mit.edu>
On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 1:07 PM, Michael Haggerty <mhagger@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
> It is unquestionably a good goal to avoid parsing references outside of
> `refs/files-backend.c`. But I'm not a fan of this approach.
Yes. But in this context it was more of a guinea pig. I wanted
something simple enough to code up show we can see what the approach
looked like. Good thing I did it.
>
> There are two meanings of the concept of a "ref store", and I think this
> change muddles them:
>
> 1. The references that happen to be *physically* stored in a particular
> location, for example the `refs/bisect/*` references in a worktree.
>
> 2. The references that *logically* should be considered part of a
> particular repository. This might require stitching together
> references from multiple sources, for example `HEAD` and
> `refs/bisect` from a worktree's own directory with other
> references from the main repository.
>
> Either of these concepts can be implemented via the `ref_store` abstraction.
>
> The `ref_store` for a submodule should represent the references
> logically visible from the submodule. The main program shouldn't care
> whether the references are stored in a single physical location or
> spread across multiple locations (for example, if the submodule were
> itself a linked worktree).
>
> The `ref_store` that you want here for a worktree is not the worktree's
> *logical* `ref_store`. You want the worktree's *physical* `ref_store`.
Yep.
> Mixing logical and physical reference stores together is a bad idea
> (even if we were willing to ignore the fact that worktrees are not
> submodules in the accepted sense of the word).
>
> ...
>
> I think the best solution would be to expose the concept of `ref_store`
> in the public refs API. Then users of submodules would essentially do
>
> struct ref_store *refs = get_submodule_refs(submodule_path);
> ... resolve_ref_recursively(refs, refname, 0, sha1, &flags) ...
> ... for_each_ref(refs, fn, cb_data) ...
>
> whereas for a worktree you'd have to look up the `ref_store` instance
> somewhere else (or maybe keep it as part of some worktree structure, if
> there is one) but you would use it via the same API.
Oh I was going to reply to Stefan about his comment to my (**)
footnote. Something along the this line
"Ideally we would introduce a new set of api, maybe with refs_ prefix,
that takes a refs_store. Then submodule people can get a ref store
somewhere and pass to it. Worktree people get maybe some other refs
store for it. The "old" api like for_each_ref() is a thin wrapper
around it, just like read_cache() vs read_index(&the_index). If the
*_submodule does not see much use, we might as well kill it and use
the generic refs_*".
If I didn't misunderstood anything else, then I think we're on the same page.
Now I need to see if I can get there in a reasonable time frame (so I
can fix my "gc in worktree" problem properly) or I would need
something temporary but not so hacky. I'll try to make this new api
and see how it works out. If you think I should not do it right away,
for whatever reason, stop me now.
--
Duy
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: GSoC 2017: application open, deadline = February 9, 2017
From: Christian Couder @ 2017-02-09 10:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Siddharth Kannan
Cc: Matthieu Moy, Jeff King, git, Pranit Bauva, Lars Schneider,
Carlos Martín Nieto, Johannes Schindelin, Thomas Gummerer
In-Reply-To: <CAN-3QhotVm-LmOJ4cuKCa2txYxFJMHY1aqbX1GznieQx57AR+A@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 11:28 AM, Siddharth Kannan
<kannan.siddharth12@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 9 February 2017 at 15:45, Matthieu Moy <Matthieu.Moy@grenoble-inp.fr> wrote:
>>
>> A non-quoted but yet important part of my initial email was:
>>
>> | So, as much as possible, I'd like to avoid being an org admin this
>> | year. It's not a lot of work (much, much less than being a mentor!),
>> | but if I manage to get some time to work for Git, I'd rather do that
>> | on coding and reviewing this year.
>>
>> and for now, no one stepped in to admin.
>
> I would like to point everyone to this reply from Jeff King on the
> original post: [1]
> (In case this was lost in the midst of other emails) It sounds like
> Jeff King is okay
> with taking up the "admin" role.
>
> I do not mind doing the administrative stuff. But the real work is in
> polishing up the ideas list and microprojects page. So I think the first
> step, if people are interested in GSoC, is not just to say "yes, let's
> do it", but to actually flesh out these pages:
Yeah it was also my impression based on the above that Peff would be
ok to take up the admin role.
Now if he doesn't want for some reason to take it, then I am ok with
us not applying, but again it would have been better to be clearer
about that before the eve of the deadline.
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: GSoC 2017: application open, deadline = February 9, 2017
From: Christian Couder @ 2017-02-09 10:45 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Matthieu Moy
Cc: Jeff King, git, Pranit Bauva, Lars Schneider,
Carlos Martín Nieto, Johannes Schindelin, Thomas Gummerer,
Siddharth Kannan
In-Reply-To: <vpqzihvpt41.fsf@anie.imag.fr>
On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 11:15 AM, Matthieu Moy
<Matthieu.Moy@grenoble-inp.fr> wrote:
> Christian Couder <christian.couder@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> On Wed, Feb 8, 2017 at 3:54 PM, Matthieu Moy
>> <Matthieu.Moy@grenoble-inp.fr> wrote:
>>> Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:
>>>
>>>> On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 04:02:02PM +0100, Matthieu Moy wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> * We need to write the application, i.e. essentially polish and update
>>>>> the text here: https://git.github.io/SoC-2016-Org-Application/ and
>>>>> update the list of project ideas and microprojects :
>>>>> https://git.github.io/SoC-2017-Ideas/
>>>>> https://git.github.io/SoC-2016-Microprojects/
>>>>
>>>> That can be done incrementally by people who care (especially mentors)
>>>> over the next week or so, and doesn't require any real admin
>>>> coordination. If it happens and the result looks good, then the
>>>> application process is pretty straightforward.
>>>>
>>>> If it doesn't, then we probably ought not to participate in GSoC.
>>>
>>> OK, it seems the last message did not raise a lot of enthousiasm (unless
>>> I missed some off-list discussion at Git-Merge?).
>>
>> I think having 2 possible mentors or co-mentors still shows some
>> enthousiasm even if I agree it's unfortunate there is not more
>> enthousiasm.
>
> A non-quoted but yet important part of my initial email was:
>
> | So, as much as possible, I'd like to avoid being an org admin this
> | year. It's not a lot of work (much, much less than being a mentor!),
> | but if I manage to get some time to work for Git, I'd rather do that
> | on coding and reviewing this year.
>
> and for now, no one stepped in to admin.
Well Peff wrote in reply to your email:
> I did co-admin last year and the year before, but I made Matthieu do all
> the work. :)
>
> I do not mind doing the administrative stuff. But the real work is in
> polishing up the ideas list and microprojects page.
So I thought Peff would be ok to be the admin (do "the administrative stuff").
> Other non-negligible sources of work are reviewing microprojects and
> applications. Having a few more messages in this thread would have been
> a good hint that we had volunteers to do that.
I don't think emails in this thread is what really counts.
I worked on the Idea page starting some months ago, and as I wrote I
reviewed it again and found it not too bad.
>> Someone steps in to do what exactly?
>
> First we need an admin. Then as you said a bit of janitoring work on
> the web pages.
About the janitoring part, as I previously said I am reluctant to do
that as I don't know what Dscho would be ok to mentor.
And I also think it's not absolutely necessary to do it before
applying as an org.
If you just want Peff or someone else to apply, then please just say
it and hopefully Peff will do it and be the admin.
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: GSoC 2017: application open, deadline = February 9, 2017
From: Siddharth Kannan @ 2017-02-09 10:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Matthieu Moy
Cc: Christian Couder, Jeff King, git, Pranit Bauva, Lars Schneider,
Carlos Martín Nieto, Johannes Schindelin, Thomas Gummerer
In-Reply-To: <vpqzihvpt41.fsf@anie.imag.fr>
On 9 February 2017 at 15:45, Matthieu Moy <Matthieu.Moy@grenoble-inp.fr> wrote:
>
> A non-quoted but yet important part of my initial email was:
>
> | So, as much as possible, I'd like to avoid being an org admin this
> | year. It's not a lot of work (much, much less than being a mentor!),
> | but if I manage to get some time to work for Git, I'd rather do that
> | on coding and reviewing this year.
>
> and for now, no one stepped in to admin.
I would like to point everyone to this reply from Jeff King on the
original post: [1]
(In case this was lost in the midst of other emails) It sounds like
Jeff King is okay
with taking up the "admin" role.
I do not mind doing the administrative stuff. But the real work is in
polishing up the ideas list and microprojects page. So I think the first
step, if people are interested in GSoC, is not just to say "yes, let's
do it", but to actually flesh out these pages:
>
>> Someone steps in to do what exactly?
>
> First we need an admin. Then as you said a bit of janitoring work on
> the web pages.
[1]: https://public-inbox.org/git/20170125204504.ebw2sa4uokfwwfnt@sigill.intra.peff.net/
--
Best Regards,
- Siddharth.
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: GSoC 2017: application open, deadline = February 9, 2017
From: Matthieu Moy @ 2017-02-09 10:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Christian Couder
Cc: Jeff King, git, Pranit Bauva, Lars Schneider,
Carlos Martín Nieto, Johannes Schindelin, Thomas Gummerer,
Siddharth Kannan
In-Reply-To: <CAP8UFD3aygSf5U2abnpCfRzEf-hH5fSNuzFBBtgCjSQC3F8c5A@mail.gmail.com>
Christian Couder <christian.couder@gmail.com> writes:
> On Wed, Feb 8, 2017 at 3:54 PM, Matthieu Moy
> <Matthieu.Moy@grenoble-inp.fr> wrote:
>> Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:
>>
>>> On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 04:02:02PM +0100, Matthieu Moy wrote:
>>>
>>>> * We need to write the application, i.e. essentially polish and update
>>>> the text here: https://git.github.io/SoC-2016-Org-Application/ and
>>>> update the list of project ideas and microprojects :
>>>> https://git.github.io/SoC-2017-Ideas/
>>>> https://git.github.io/SoC-2016-Microprojects/
>>>
>>> That can be done incrementally by people who care (especially mentors)
>>> over the next week or so, and doesn't require any real admin
>>> coordination. If it happens and the result looks good, then the
>>> application process is pretty straightforward.
>>>
>>> If it doesn't, then we probably ought not to participate in GSoC.
>>
>> OK, it seems the last message did not raise a lot of enthousiasm (unless
>> I missed some off-list discussion at Git-Merge?).
>
> I think having 2 possible mentors or co-mentors still shows some
> enthousiasm even if I agree it's unfortunate there is not more
> enthousiasm.
A non-quoted but yet important part of my initial email was:
| So, as much as possible, I'd like to avoid being an org admin this
| year. It's not a lot of work (much, much less than being a mentor!),
| but if I manage to get some time to work for Git, I'd rather do that
| on coding and reviewing this year.
and for now, no one stepped in to admin.
Other non-negligible sources of work are reviewing microprojects and
applications. Having a few more messages in this thread would have been
a good hint that we had volunteers to do that.
> Someone steps in to do what exactly?
First we need an admin. Then as you said a bit of janitoring work on
the web pages.
--
Matthieu Moy
http://www-verimag.imag.fr/~moy/
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: Automatically Add .gitignore Files
From: Duy Nguyen @ 2017-02-09 10:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Thangalin; +Cc: Git Mailing List
In-Reply-To: <CAANrE7rmUZcJkw+thMczv3D=7sqcUHBsorzvEZgYg=6AEfrU=w@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 2:05 AM, Thangalin <thangalin@gmail.com> wrote:
> I frequently forget to add .gitignore files when creating new .gitignore files.
>
> I'd like to request a command-line option to always add .gitignore
> files (or, more generally, always add files that match a given file
> specification).
>
> Replicate
>
> 0. git init ...
> 1. echo "*.bak" >> .gitignore
> 2. touch file.txt
> 3. git add file.txt
> 4. git commit -a -m "..."
> 5. git push origin master
>
> Expected Results
>
> The .gitignore file is also added to the repository. (This is probably
> the 80% use case.)
This is a general problem to new files, not .gitignore alone. Can we
accomplish something with some hook? At the least I think we should be
able to detect that .gitignore is not detected and abort, prompting
the user to add it. It's easier to customize too, and we don't have to
cook ".gitignore" in the code.
I'm not sure if we tell the hook "this is with -m option" though..
--
Duy
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: [PATCH] rev-parse --git-path: fix output when running in a subdirectory
From: Duy Nguyen @ 2017-02-09 9:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Johannes Schindelin; +Cc: Git Mailing List, Junio C Hamano
In-Reply-To: <50fe3ea3302c40f4c96eaa5a568837e3334f9dc4.1486555851.git.johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
On Wed, Feb 8, 2017 at 7:17 PM, Johannes Schindelin
<johannes.schindelin@gmx.de> wrote:
> In addition to making git_path() aware of certain file names that need
> to be handled differently e.g. when running in worktrees, the commit
> 557bd833bb (git_path(): be aware of file relocation in $GIT_DIR,
> 2014-11-30) also snuck in a new option for `git rev-parse`:
> `--git-path`.
>
> On the face of it, there is no obvious bug in that commit's diff: it
> faithfully calls git_path() on the argument and prints it out, i.e. `git
> rev-parse --git-path <filename>` has the same precise behavior as
> calling `git_path("<filename>")` in C.
>
> The problem lies deeper, much deeper. In hindsight (which is always
> unfair), implementing the .git/ directory discovery in
> `setup_git_directory()` by changing the working directory may have
> allowed us to avoid passing around a struct that contains information
> about the current repository, but it bought us many, many problems.
Relevant thread in the past [1] which fixes both --git-path and
--git-common-dir. I think the author dropped it somehow (or forgot
about it, I know I did). Sorry can't comment on that thread, or this
patch, yet.
[1] http://public-inbox.org/git/1464261556-89722-1-git-send-email-rappazzo@gmail.com/
--
Duy
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: GSoC 2017: application open, deadline = February 9, 2017
From: Christian Couder @ 2017-02-09 9:42 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Matthieu Moy
Cc: Jeff King, git, Pranit Bauva, Lars Schneider,
Carlos Martín Nieto, Johannes Schindelin, Thomas Gummerer,
Siddharth Kannan
In-Reply-To: <vpq37fowx5q.fsf@anie.imag.fr>
On Wed, Feb 8, 2017 at 3:54 PM, Matthieu Moy
<Matthieu.Moy@grenoble-inp.fr> wrote:
> Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:
>
>> On Mon, Jan 23, 2017 at 04:02:02PM +0100, Matthieu Moy wrote:
>>
>>> * We need to write the application, i.e. essentially polish and update
>>> the text here: https://git.github.io/SoC-2016-Org-Application/ and
>>> update the list of project ideas and microprojects :
>>> https://git.github.io/SoC-2017-Ideas/
>>> https://git.github.io/SoC-2016-Microprojects/
>>
>> That can be done incrementally by people who care (especially mentors)
>> over the next week or so, and doesn't require any real admin
>> coordination. If it happens and the result looks good, then the
>> application process is pretty straightforward.
>>
>> If it doesn't, then we probably ought not to participate in GSoC.
>
> OK, it seems the last message did not raise a lot of enthousiasm (unless
> I missed some off-list discussion at Git-Merge?).
I think having 2 possible mentors or co-mentors still shows some
enthousiasm even if I agree it's unfortunate there is not more
enthousiasm.
> The application deadline is tomorrow. I think it's time to admit that we
> won't participate this year, unless someone steps in really soon.
Someone steps in to do what exactly?
I just had a look and the microproject and idea pages for this year are ok.
They are not great sure, but not much worse than the previous years.
What should probably be done is to remove project ideas where is no
"possible mentor" listed.
But I am reluctant to do that as I don't know what Dscho would be ok to mentor.
Also please note that you sent this email just the day before the deadline.
I know that you sent a previous email three weeks ago, but people
easily forget this kind of deadline when they are not often reminded.
(And there is a school vacation is France right now so I am having a
vacation in Alps with unfortunately quite bad Internet access.)
> If we don't participate, I'll add a disclaimer at the top of the
> SoC-related pages on git.github.io to make sure students don't waste
> time preparing an application.
Please submit our application like this.
Thanks,
Christian.
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: [PATCH 2/2] worktree.c: use submodule interface to access refs from another worktree
From: Michael Haggerty @ 2017-02-09 8:04 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Junio C Hamano; +Cc: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy, git
In-Reply-To: <xmqqpoirsvin.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com>
On 02/09/2017 07:55 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Michael Haggerty <mhagger@alum.mit.edu> writes:
>
>> There are two meanings of the concept of a "ref store", and I think this
>> change muddles them:
>>
>> 1. The references that happen to be *physically* stored in a particular
>> location, for example the `refs/bisect/*` references in a worktree.
>>
>> 2. The references that *logically* should be considered part of a
>> particular repository. This might require stitching together
>> references from multiple sources, for example `HEAD` and
>> `refs/bisect` from a worktree's own directory with other
>> references from the main repository.
>>
>> Either of these concepts can be implemented via the `ref_store` abstraction.
>> ...
>> The `ref_store` that you want here for a worktree is not the worktree's
>> *logical* `ref_store`. You want the worktree's *physical* `ref_store`.
>> Mixing logical and physical reference stores together is a bad idea
>> (even if we were willing to ignore the fact that worktrees are not
>> submodules in the accepted sense of the word).
>
> I am not quite sure what mental model you are suggesting as a
> preferred solution. We can
>
> - represent a set of refs stored for a particular worktree
> (i.e. HEAD, refs/bisect, and refs/worktree/<name>, iirc), as
> bunch of ref_stores;
>
> - represent a set of refs shared across a set of worktrees that
> share the primary one, as another ref_store;
>
> - a caller who wants to get a "logical" view of a single worktree
> user can pick one of the first kind and union that with the
> second one, and represent the result as a (synthetic) ref_store.
>
> The third one is "stitching together from multiple sources". By
> "mixing logical and physical is a bad idea", do you mean that the
> same abstraction "ref_store" should not be used for the first two
> (which are physical) and the third one (which is logical)? Do you
> want to call the first two "physical_ref_store"and the last one
> "ref_store" and keep them distinct?
The existing `ref_store` abstraction, I think, is capable of
representing either kind of reference store. The stitching together to
get the "logical" view of a worktree should probably happen within the
refs code rather than forcing callers to deal with it. But yes, I think
that code should put together a compound `ref_store` object that
delegates to multiple underlying `ref_store` objects as you've described.
Which kind of `ref_store *` you have in your hand would depend on where
you got it. If you call the hypothetical `get_submodule_refs()`
function, you would get a `ref_store *` representing the references that
are logically visible from that submodule. There might be a separate
`get_worktree_specific_refs()` that returns a `ref_store *` representing
the worktree-specific references physically stored for the worktree. But
maybe the latter is not even necessary; see below.
> For the purpose of anchoring objects in the object store shared by
> multiple worktrees, we can either iterate over all the ref_stores
> of the first two kind, or iterate over all the ref_stores of the
> third kind for all worktrees. The latter of course is less
> efficient as the enumeration
>
> for worktree in all worktrees:
> for ref in get_ref_store(worktree)
> mark tip of ref reachable
>
> will work on all the shared refs multiple times, but as an
> abstraction that may be simpler. The alternative of working at the
> physical level would be more efficient
>
> for worktree in all worktrees:
> for ref in get_ref_store_specific_to_worktree(worktree):
> mark tip of ref reachable
> for ref in get_ref_store_shared_across_worktrees():
> mark tip of ref reachable
>
> but this consumer now _knows_ how the logical ref_store of a
> worktree is constructed (i.e. by combining the two ref_stores),
> which appears as a layering violation.
>
> I am however not sure if these issues are what you are driving at,
> and what exact design you are suggesting.
Reachability is a special case, because it needs all of the references
that refer to a particular object store, even though the reference names
might overlap. I personally think that reachability roots should be
requested via a new refs API call separate from `for_each_rawref()` (or
whatever is used now). Internally it would be implemented much like your
second "efficient" algorithm, but the implementation would be within the
refs code, and the caller could remain ignorant of those details.
Externally, it might not even want to pass the caller the real reference
names (I assume that callers mainly only use the reference names for
diagnostic messages). For example, it might want to report references
`HEAD` and `refs/bisect/bad` in worktree `foo` under the pseudonyms
`worktree/foo/HEAD` and `worktree/foo/refs/bisect/bad`, so that they can
be distinguished from any homonyms in the main repo and in other
worktrees. If you ask for the reachability roots while in a worktree, it
would either automatically crawl up to the main repository and across to
sibling worktrees to get the full set of reachability roots, or maybe it
would refuse to run at all (if we want to require such commands to be
executed from the main repo).
I don't know exactly who would be the consumers of the reachability
roots, so maybe there are some problems with this suggestion.
Michael
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: "disabling bitmap writing, as some objects are not being packed"?
From: David Turner @ 2017-02-08 19:05 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Junio C Hamano; +Cc: Duy Nguyen, Git Mailing List, Jeff King
In-Reply-To: <xmqqtw84wpag.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com>
On Wed, 2017-02-08 at 09:44 -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Duy Nguyen <pclouds@gmail.com> writes:
>
> > On second thought, perhaps gc.autoDetach should default to false if
> > there's no tty, since its main point it to stop breaking interactive
> > usage. That would make the server side happy (no tty there).
>
> Sounds like an idea, but wouldn't that keep the end-user coming over
> the network waiting after accepting a push until the GC completes, I
> wonder. If an impatient user disconnects, would that end up killing
> an ongoing GC? etc.
Regardless, it's impolite to keep the user waiting. So, I think we
should just not write the "too many unreachable loose objects" message
if auto-gc is on. Does that sound OK?
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: [PATCH 2/2] worktree.c: use submodule interface to access refs from another worktree
From: Junio C Hamano @ 2017-02-09 6:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Michael Haggerty; +Cc: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy, git
In-Reply-To: <37fe2024-0378-a974-a28d-18a89d3e2312@alum.mit.edu>
Michael Haggerty <mhagger@alum.mit.edu> writes:
> There are two meanings of the concept of a "ref store", and I think this
> change muddles them:
>
> 1. The references that happen to be *physically* stored in a particular
> location, for example the `refs/bisect/*` references in a worktree.
>
> 2. The references that *logically* should be considered part of a
> particular repository. This might require stitching together
> references from multiple sources, for example `HEAD` and
> `refs/bisect` from a worktree's own directory with other
> references from the main repository.
>
> Either of these concepts can be implemented via the `ref_store` abstraction.
> ...
> The `ref_store` that you want here for a worktree is not the worktree's
> *logical* `ref_store`. You want the worktree's *physical* `ref_store`.
> Mixing logical and physical reference stores together is a bad idea
> (even if we were willing to ignore the fact that worktrees are not
> submodules in the accepted sense of the word).
I am not quite sure what mental model you are suggesting as a
preferred solution. We can
- represent a set of refs stored for a particular worktree
(i.e. HEAD, refs/bisect, and refs/worktree/<name>, iirc), as
bunch of ref_stores;
- represent a set of refs shared across a set of worktrees that
share the primary one, as another ref_store;
- a caller who wants to get a "logical" view of a single worktree
user can pick one of the first kind and union that with the
second one, and represent the result as a (synthetic) ref_store.
The third one is "stitching together from multiple sources". By
"mixing logical and physical is a bad idea", do you mean that the
same abstraction "ref_store" should not be used for the first two
(which are physical) and the third one (which is logical)? Do you
want to call the first two "physical_ref_store"and the last one
"ref_store" and keep them distinct?
For the purpose of anchoring objects in the object store shared by
multiple worktrees, we can either iterate over all the ref_stores
of the first two kind, or iterate over all the ref_stores of the
third kind for all worktrees. The latter of course is less
efficient as the enumeration
for worktree in all worktrees:
for ref in get_ref_store(worktree)
mark tip of ref reachable
will work on all the shared refs multiple times, but as an
abstraction that may be simpler. The alternative of working at the
physical level would be more efficient
for worktree in all worktrees:
for ref in get_ref_store_specific_to_worktree(worktree):
mark tip of ref reachable
for ref in get_ref_store_shared_across_worktrees():
mark tip of ref reachable
but this consumer now _knows_ how the logical ref_store of a
worktree is constructed (i.e. by combining the two ref_stores),
which appears as a layering violation.
I am however not sure if these issues are what you are driving at,
and what exact design you are suggesting.
^ permalink raw reply
* Re: [PATCH 2/2] worktree.c: use submodule interface to access refs from another worktree
From: Michael Haggerty @ 2017-02-09 6:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy, git; +Cc: Junio C Hamano
In-Reply-To: <20170208113144.8201-3-pclouds@gmail.com>
On 02/08/2017 12:31 PM, Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy wrote:
> The patch itself is relatively simple: manual parsing code is replaced
> with a call to resolve_ref_submodule(). The manual parsing code must die
> because only refs/files-backend.c should do that. Why submodule here is
> a more interesting question.
>
> From an outside look, any .git/worktrees/foo is seen as a "normal"
> repository. You can set GIT_DIR to it and have access to everything,
> even shared things that are not literally inside that directory, like
> object db or shared refs.
>
> On top of that, linked worktrees point to those directories with ".git"
> files. These two make a linked worktree's path "X" a "submodule" (*) (**)
> because X/.git is a file that points to a repository somewhere.
>
> As such, we can just linked worktree's path as a submodule. We just need
> to make sure they are unique because they are used to lookup submodule
> refs store.
>
> Main worktree is a a bit trickier. If we stand at a linked worktree, we
> may still need to peek into main worktree's HEAD, for example. We can
> treat main worktree's path as submodule as well since git_path_submodule()
> can tolerate ".git" dirs, in addition to ".git" files.
>
> The constraint is, if main worktree is X, then the git repo must be at
> X/.git. If the user separates .git repo far away and tell git to point
> to it via GIT_DIR or something else, then the "main worktree as submodule"
> trick fails. Within multiple worktree context, I think we can limit
> support to "standard" layout, at least for now.
>
> (*) The differences in sharing object database and refs between
> submodules and linked worktrees don't really matter in this context.
>
> (**) At this point, we may want to rename refs *_submodule API to
> something more neutral, maybe s/_submodule/_remote/
It is unquestionably a good goal to avoid parsing references outside of
`refs/files-backend.c`. But I'm not a fan of this approach.
There are two meanings of the concept of a "ref store", and I think this
change muddles them:
1. The references that happen to be *physically* stored in a particular
location, for example the `refs/bisect/*` references in a worktree.
2. The references that *logically* should be considered part of a
particular repository. This might require stitching together
references from multiple sources, for example `HEAD` and
`refs/bisect` from a worktree's own directory with other
references from the main repository.
Either of these concepts can be implemented via the `ref_store` abstraction.
The `ref_store` for a submodule should represent the references
logically visible from the submodule. The main program shouldn't care
whether the references are stored in a single physical location or
spread across multiple locations (for example, if the submodule were
itself a linked worktree).
The `ref_store` that you want here for a worktree is not the worktree's
*logical* `ref_store`. You want the worktree's *physical* `ref_store`.
Mixing logical and physical reference stores together is a bad idea
(even if we were willing to ignore the fact that worktrees are not
submodules in the accepted sense of the word).
The point of my `submodule-hash` branch [1] was to separate these
concepts better by breaking the current 1:1 connection between
`ref_store`s and submodules. This would allow `ref_store`s to be created
for other purposes, such as to represent worktree refs. If you want the
*logical* `ref_store` for a submodule, you access it through the
`submodule_ref_stores` table. If you want the *physical* `ref_store` for
a worktree, you should access it through a different table.
I think the best solution would be to expose the concept of `ref_store`
in the public refs API. Then users of submodules would essentially do
struct ref_store *refs = get_submodule_refs(submodule_path);
... resolve_ref_recursively(refs, refname, 0, sha1, &flags) ...
... for_each_ref(refs, fn, cb_data) ...
whereas for a worktree you'd have to look up the `ref_store` instance
somewhere else (or maybe keep it as part of some worktree structure, if
there is one) but you would use it via the same API.
Michael
[1] https://github.com/mhagger/git
> Signed-off-by: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy <pclouds@gmail.com>
> ---
> branch.c | 3 +-
> worktree.c | 99 +++++++++++++++-----------------------------------------------
> worktree.h | 2 +-
> 3 files changed, 27 insertions(+), 77 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/branch.c b/branch.c
> index b955d4f316..db5843718f 100644
> --- a/branch.c
> +++ b/branch.c
> @@ -354,7 +354,8 @@ int replace_each_worktree_head_symref(const char *oldref, const char *newref)
> for (i = 0; worktrees[i]; i++) {
> if (worktrees[i]->is_detached)
> continue;
> - if (strcmp(oldref, worktrees[i]->head_ref))
> + if (worktrees[i]->head_ref &&
> + strcmp(oldref, worktrees[i]->head_ref))
> continue;
>
> if (set_worktree_head_symref(get_worktree_git_dir(worktrees[i]),
> diff --git a/worktree.c b/worktree.c
> index d633761575..25e5bc9a3e 100644
> --- a/worktree.c
> +++ b/worktree.c
> @@ -19,54 +19,24 @@ void free_worktrees(struct worktree **worktrees)
> free (worktrees);
> }
>
> -/*
> - * read 'path_to_ref' into 'ref'. Also if is_detached is not NULL,
> - * set is_detached to 1 (0) if the ref is detached (is not detached).
> - *
> - * $GIT_COMMON_DIR/$symref (e.g. HEAD) is practically outside $GIT_DIR so
> - * for linked worktrees, `resolve_ref_unsafe()` won't work (it uses
> - * git_path). Parse the ref ourselves.
> - *
> - * return -1 if the ref is not a proper ref, 0 otherwise (success)
> - */
> -static int parse_ref(char *path_to_ref, struct strbuf *ref, int *is_detached)
> -{
> - if (is_detached)
> - *is_detached = 0;
> - if (!strbuf_readlink(ref, path_to_ref, 0)) {
> - /* HEAD is symbolic link */
> - if (!starts_with(ref->buf, "refs/") ||
> - check_refname_format(ref->buf, 0))
> - return -1;
> - } else if (strbuf_read_file(ref, path_to_ref, 0) >= 0) {
> - /* textual symref or detached */
> - if (!starts_with(ref->buf, "ref:")) {
> - if (is_detached)
> - *is_detached = 1;
> - } else {
> - strbuf_remove(ref, 0, strlen("ref:"));
> - strbuf_trim(ref);
> - if (check_refname_format(ref->buf, 0))
> - return -1;
> - }
> - } else
> - return -1;
> - return 0;
> -}
> -
> /**
> - * Add the head_sha1 and head_ref (if not detached) to the given worktree
> + * Update head_sha1, head_ref and is_detached of the given worktree
> */
> -static void add_head_info(struct strbuf *head_ref, struct worktree *worktree)
> +static void add_head_info(struct worktree *wt)
> {
> - if (head_ref->len) {
> - if (worktree->is_detached) {
> - get_sha1_hex(head_ref->buf, worktree->head_sha1);
> - } else {
> - resolve_ref_unsafe(head_ref->buf, 0, worktree->head_sha1, NULL);
> - worktree->head_ref = strbuf_detach(head_ref, NULL);
> - }
> - }
> + int flags;
> + const char *target;
> +
> + target = resolve_ref_submodule(wt->path, "HEAD",
> + RESOLVE_REF_READING,
> + wt->head_sha1, &flags);
> + if (!target)
> + return;
> +
> + if (flags & REF_ISSYMREF)
> + wt->head_ref = xstrdup(target);
> + else
> + wt->is_detached = 1;
> }
>
> /**
> @@ -77,9 +47,7 @@ static struct worktree *get_main_worktree(void)
> struct worktree *worktree = NULL;
> struct strbuf path = STRBUF_INIT;
> struct strbuf worktree_path = STRBUF_INIT;
> - struct strbuf head_ref = STRBUF_INIT;
> int is_bare = 0;
> - int is_detached = 0;
>
> strbuf_add_absolute_path(&worktree_path, get_git_common_dir());
> is_bare = !strbuf_strip_suffix(&worktree_path, "/.git");
> @@ -91,13 +59,10 @@ static struct worktree *get_main_worktree(void)
> worktree = xcalloc(1, sizeof(*worktree));
> worktree->path = strbuf_detach(&worktree_path, NULL);
> worktree->is_bare = is_bare;
> - worktree->is_detached = is_detached;
> - if (!parse_ref(path.buf, &head_ref, &is_detached))
> - add_head_info(&head_ref, worktree);
> + add_head_info(worktree);
>
> strbuf_release(&path);
> strbuf_release(&worktree_path);
> - strbuf_release(&head_ref);
> return worktree;
> }
>
> @@ -106,8 +71,6 @@ static struct worktree *get_linked_worktree(const char *id)
> struct worktree *worktree = NULL;
> struct strbuf path = STRBUF_INIT;
> struct strbuf worktree_path = STRBUF_INIT;
> - struct strbuf head_ref = STRBUF_INIT;
> - int is_detached = 0;
>
> if (!id)
> die("Missing linked worktree name");
> @@ -127,19 +90,14 @@ static struct worktree *get_linked_worktree(const char *id)
> strbuf_reset(&path);
> strbuf_addf(&path, "%s/worktrees/%s/HEAD", get_git_common_dir(), id);
>
> - if (parse_ref(path.buf, &head_ref, &is_detached) < 0)
> - goto done;
> -
> worktree = xcalloc(1, sizeof(*worktree));
> worktree->path = strbuf_detach(&worktree_path, NULL);
> worktree->id = xstrdup(id);
> - worktree->is_detached = is_detached;
> - add_head_info(&head_ref, worktree);
> + add_head_info(worktree);
>
> done:
> strbuf_release(&path);
> strbuf_release(&worktree_path);
> - strbuf_release(&head_ref);
> return worktree;
> }
>
> @@ -334,8 +292,6 @@ const struct worktree *find_shared_symref(const char *symref,
> const char *target)
> {
> const struct worktree *existing = NULL;
> - struct strbuf path = STRBUF_INIT;
> - struct strbuf sb = STRBUF_INIT;
> static struct worktree **worktrees;
> int i = 0;
>
> @@ -345,6 +301,10 @@ const struct worktree *find_shared_symref(const char *symref,
>
> for (i = 0; worktrees[i]; i++) {
> struct worktree *wt = worktrees[i];
> + const char *symref_target;
> + unsigned char sha1[20];
> + int flags;
> +
> if (wt->is_bare)
> continue;
>
> @@ -359,25 +319,14 @@ const struct worktree *find_shared_symref(const char *symref,
> }
> }
>
> - strbuf_reset(&path);
> - strbuf_reset(&sb);
> - strbuf_addf(&path, "%s/%s",
> - get_worktree_git_dir(wt),
> - symref);
> -
> - if (parse_ref(path.buf, &sb, NULL)) {
> - continue;
> - }
> -
> - if (!strcmp(sb.buf, target)) {
> + symref_target = resolve_ref_submodule(wt->path, symref, 0,
> + sha1, &flags);
> + if ((flags & REF_ISSYMREF) && !strcmp(symref_target, target)) {
> existing = wt;
> break;
> }
> }
>
> - strbuf_release(&path);
> - strbuf_release(&sb);
> -
> return existing;
> }
>
> diff --git a/worktree.h b/worktree.h
> index 6bfb985203..5ea5e503fb 100644
> --- a/worktree.h
> +++ b/worktree.h
> @@ -4,7 +4,7 @@
> struct worktree {
> char *path;
> char *id;
> - char *head_ref;
> + char *head_ref; /* NULL if HEAD is broken or detached */
> char *lock_reason; /* internal use */
> unsigned char head_sha1[20];
> int is_detached;
>
^ permalink raw reply
page: next (older) | prev (newer) | latest
- recent:[subjects (threaded)|topics (new)|topics (active)]
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox