From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.1 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI, RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 30DD620899 for ; Mon, 14 Aug 2017 19:58:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751665AbdHNT6y (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 Aug 2017 15:58:54 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com ([64.147.108.70]:50502 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751575AbdHNT6y (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 Aug 2017 15:58:54 -0400 Received: from sasl.smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3200D94757; Mon, 14 Aug 2017 15:58:53 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=01B0dQV3xiuxhYyaKAnxdtLSggE=; b=Sx4VaI hSYxlN4O2qpFU2qalBizdDS0fzLmkpqNMFxXYikR1Ba6y/krvil0+HTOD+sHVvCS Y6gb2WXlB5l6haB8P58t2dsLKKRKEAVoxkJkk5laF0Fg5BuvA/wBu5l5vdTF034m NFzZG5wZP9HJS3gkznLPm+3royqO9cTBbX8XI= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=UKCqGFxXHqtO8eGt8m0iRPGLNc+kR+mu ZovLC50kH/kyO9eCKFPA2KJ53MxDMJHULa5jTYxviQJLNnAGdRand9byPkEoHsnY wVMitYAxKhEIx3n/B3MGKCfLFd5mglZLcyAXdsbMIL9BGVyZxxNC2G9yaAgaI8WR s/smf7HiFZU= Received: from pb-smtp1.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 29BCF94756; Mon, 14 Aug 2017 15:58:53 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [104.132.0.95]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9AAD594753; Mon, 14 Aug 2017 15:58:52 -0400 (EDT) From: Junio C Hamano To: Ramsay Jones Cc: Martin Koegler , git@vger.kernel.org, Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/9] Convert pack-objects to size_t References: <1502527643-21944-1-git-send-email-martin@mail.zuhause> <87fc215e-b860-10f5-5c5e-60652502fae8@ramsayjones.plus.com> <20170813183026.GC31079@mail.zuhause> <627042be-ab86-e9da-8c4e-5aac3278f5c6@ramsayjones.plus.com> Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2017 12:58:51 -0700 In-Reply-To: (Ramsay Jones's message of "Mon, 14 Aug 2017 20:31:50 +0100") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: FF1811E2-812A-11E7-8E74-FE4B1A68708C-77302942!pb-smtp1.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Ramsay Jones writes: > In a previous comment, I said that (on 32-bit Linux) it was likely > that an object of > 4GB could not be handled correctly anyway. (more > likely > 2GB). This was based on the code from (quite some) years ago. > In particular, before you added the "streaming API". So, maybe a 32-bit > arch _should_ be able to handle objects as large as the LFS API allows. > (Ignoring, for the moment, that I think anybody who puts files of that > size into an SCM probably gets what they deserve. :-P ). > > The two patches I commented on, however, changed the type of some > variables from off_t to size_t. In general, the patches did not > seem to make anything worse, but these type changes could potentially > do harm. Hence my comment. (I still haven't tried the patches on my > 32-bit Linux system. I only boot it up about once a week, and I would > rather wait until the patches are in the 'pu' branch before testing). We are in perfect agreement. I didn't mean to say that it is OK to replace off_t with size_t without a good reason, especially when the current code (at least the part I looked at anyway, like the OFS_DELTA part) seems to use off_t correctly, and your review comments are very much appreciated, so is the effort started by Martin to take us in the direction of using types more appropriate than "ulong".