public inbox for git@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
To: Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] odb: drop gaps in object info flag values
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2026 08:58:28 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <xmqqa4y0jop7.fsf@gitster.g> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260126-b4-pks-read-object-info-flags-v1-3-e682a003b17c@pks.im> (Patrick Steinhardt's message of "Mon, 26 Jan 2026 13:17:43 +0100")

Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im> writes:

> +enum object_info_flags {
> +	/* Invoke lookup_replace_object() on the given hash. */
> +	OBJECT_INFO_LOOKUP_REPLACE = (1 << 0),
> +
> +	/* Do not reprepare object sources when the first lookup has failed. */
> +	OBJECT_INFO_QUICK = (1 << 1),
> +
> +	/*
> +	 * Do not attempt to fetch the object if missing (even if fetch_is_missing is
> +	 * nonzero).
> +	 */
> +	OBJECT_INFO_SKIP_FETCH_OBJECT = (1 << 2),
> +
> +	/* Die if object corruption (not just an object being missing) was detected. */
> +	OBJECT_INFO_DIE_IF_CORRUPT = (1 << 3),
>  
> -/* Die if object corruption (not just an object being missing) was detected. */
> -#define OBJECT_INFO_DIE_IF_CORRUPT 32
> +	/*
> +	 * This is meant for bulk prefetching of missing blobs in a partial
> +	 * clone. Implies OBJECT_INFO_SKIP_FETCH_OBJECT and OBJECT_INFO_QUICK.
> +	 */
> +	OBJECT_INFO_FOR_PREFETCH = (OBJECT_INFO_SKIP_FETCH_OBJECT | OBJECT_INFO_QUICK),
> +};
>  
>  /*
>   * Read object info from the object database and populate the `object_info`

I wonder if this series can be restructured a bit to demonstrate the
benefit of moving to enum a bit more prominently.  For example, even
at the end of the three patches, odb_read_object_info_extended()
still takes an "unsigned flags" parameter, but it is meant to take
this new enum, isn't it?  If we do the "#define to enum" conversion
(without renumbering) first, then "unsigned to enum", would it, with
appropriate compiler warning flags, already reveal the existing bugs
that happened to be working OK as potential problems?  And with that,
fixes in 1/3 and 2/3 would demonstrate why #define to enum" is worth
doing very well.  And after all that, we can renumber the enums in a
separate and final step.

Exactly the same comment applies to odb_has_object() that still
takes "unsigned flags", even though HAS_OBJECT_* constants have
already gone through the "#define to enum" conversion with an earier
f8fc4cac (object-store: allow fetching objects via `has_object()`,
2025-04-29).

In any case, well spotted and nicely done.
Thanks.

  reply	other threads:[~2026-01-26 16:58 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2026-01-26 12:17 [PATCH 0/3] Small fixups for `OBJECT_INFO` flags Patrick Steinhardt
2026-01-26 12:17 ` [PATCH 1/3] builtin/backfill: fix flags passed to `odb_has_object()` Patrick Steinhardt
2026-01-26 20:17   ` Derrick Stolee
2026-01-26 21:07     ` Junio C Hamano
2026-02-09 19:57   ` Justin Tobler
2026-02-10  9:24   ` Karthik Nayak
2026-02-10  9:32     ` Karthik Nayak
2026-01-26 12:17 ` [PATCH 2/3] builtin/fsck: " Patrick Steinhardt
2026-02-09 20:04   ` Justin Tobler
2026-01-26 12:17 ` [PATCH 3/3] odb: drop gaps in object info flag values Patrick Steinhardt
2026-01-26 16:58   ` Junio C Hamano [this message]
2026-01-26 18:02     ` René Scharfe
2026-01-26 18:13       ` Junio C Hamano
2026-01-27  6:29         ` Patrick Steinhardt
2026-02-09 20:32           ` Justin Tobler
2026-02-09 20:18   ` Justin Tobler
2026-01-26 16:28 ` [PATCH 0/3] Small fixups for `OBJECT_INFO` flags Junio C Hamano
2026-02-12  6:59 ` [PATCH v2 0/5] " Patrick Steinhardt
2026-02-12  6:59   ` [PATCH v2 1/5] builtin/backfill: fix flags passed to `odb_has_object()` Patrick Steinhardt
2026-02-12  6:59   ` [PATCH v2 2/5] builtin/fsck: " Patrick Steinhardt
2026-02-12  6:59   ` [PATCH v2 3/5] odb: drop gaps in object info flag values Patrick Steinhardt
2026-02-12  6:59   ` [PATCH v2 4/5] odb: convert object info flags into an enum Patrick Steinhardt
2026-02-12  6:59   ` [PATCH v2 5/5] odb: convert `odb_has_object()` " Patrick Steinhardt

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=xmqqa4y0jop7.fsf@gitster.g \
    --to=gitster@pobox.com \
    --cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=ps@pks.im \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox