From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from fhigh-b8-smtp.messagingengine.com (fhigh-b8-smtp.messagingengine.com [202.12.124.159]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 808E727702D for ; Mon, 6 Apr 2026 17:36:01 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=202.12.124.159 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1775496962; cv=none; b=LomCv5GYoeswCtDEPdIrW7snw+BFfe5haBDRaFnqLyYdWU6/bdETPzeXgIG92d/1k5vbeknXPV4Rbc7H9kyJIIY0FNvc+9YKFvpOmN5llh2xUonxXUYgTjD9zHp4FWP78iaJk5CYzdDebfoB0WEJKXC+zyljuQ6nM4p6ECXeRTQ= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1775496962; c=relaxed/simple; bh=8fi/MjoFkwqKBHjzLOfqXiPTzYvIshIid8Ifgs/BBuA=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=Ht798Rw1lCiavKq4ddySVZKdGgSkBcru5+0o0ZVYXiR1wjQGDZmXPnnB+xn42hFVG/RCiSGwj+QbpeStaj8Cbe9S5w6JXtWCwlsMUCYRoWh8siLD+HOL47LSyGpKW9kVrJ5QSHSo87RzThuZBl2ED72enlsicolTdpHer9xVpPs= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=pobox.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pobox.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b=yJhVOLAP; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b=dgNgf33M; arc=none smtp.client-ip=202.12.124.159 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=pobox.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pobox.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b="yJhVOLAP"; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b="dgNgf33M" Received: from phl-compute-06.internal (phl-compute-06.internal [10.202.2.46]) by mailfhigh.stl.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id A0F377A02A5; Mon, 6 Apr 2026 13:36:00 -0400 (EDT) Received: from phl-frontend-02 ([10.202.2.161]) by phl-compute-06.internal (MEProxy); Mon, 06 Apr 2026 13:36:00 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=cc :cc:content-type:content-type:date:date:from:from:in-reply-to :in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:subject :subject:to:to; s=fm1; t=1775496960; x=1775583360; bh=0rD+ZUPXFN +wkrw7zEFzzTyMkjDYsjmAEh6zjXs4dNw=; b=yJhVOLAPtL1J/Y/wgp42Kyb9AY zcD2s07tf96TL+7sbkKgZcmMk2HjTKzlBBPW4fDoxD0l92eK/axLLBlCwnsIfy+g dDDIkgi2sQcJF0Tw3wr+HIRIuwa+1gl7XGPD/kqYEgk7B55m0rThPz7DbMJmo/fS jKtL+SYzXcfDvdK5Kdes93a8LsB+laNevru85AU8XUx2vrafLOyg7EyVBH2MiJ9i x+dt0YcdOAI9pqP9bQkOrV3niRRUujDmI/1FDX+cSXwSVilTGiymSAPiUABRYhhx 2yhmgVo8vXe9Lmf4ZJ4VavxAEzRVuj+J6v8OIW0yMy2LhCcJeFk2RyoQfCdA== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-type:content-type:date:date :feedback-id:feedback-id:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:subject:subject:to :to:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; t= 1775496960; x=1775583360; bh=0rD+ZUPXFN+wkrw7zEFzzTyMkjDYsjmAEh6 zjXs4dNw=; b=dgNgf33MDX3xp6pI1YkbMsr6DKz63WLaqAwnww7cVBsB1oibFI5 aGA1rm0KaQh8iwZeK0Nqbvm8qoaQhWpZVvjNrJu+7sX7f3m1FCv1016N4N/riNUa SZo2mF6Bt8bzraBTWuO6pvXKr2CeVocSXa3F1COC/Foj9bRVQVQF8JAyaea1WkHq hYsIVKzsXjwR5bXyY4PWiYg8JmOjBQqq89ISZmaFGwbhK0Ln3NRLhF898dDFV8/H /diZbKOKOYjIO1GylTeYG4/mW4Q7ehMWx6oz3xJajPtAwAZ8qRS7dI504JlgWRDT 8fSd7/pTGJ5u5kmCs6P30OpDvkNR/ZPfJ+Q== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeefhedrtddtgddukeefhecutefuodetggdotefrod ftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecuuegr ihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenucfjug hrpefhvfevufgjfhffkfgfgggtsehttdertddtredtnecuhfhrohhmpefluhhnihhoucev ucfjrghmrghnohcuoehgihhtshhtvghrsehpohgsohigrdgtohhmqeenucggtffrrghtth gvrhhnpeefveetteejheeugeffledvteeiveffueefjeelueffteeigffgfedthfefieeg ieenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehgih htshhtvghrsehpohgsohigrdgtohhmpdhnsggprhgtphhtthhopeegpdhmohguvgepshhm thhpohhuthdprhgtphhtthhopehsthholhgvvgesghhmrghilhdrtghomhdprhgtphhtth hopehvihhkihhnghhttgegsehgmhgrihhlrdgtohhmpdhrtghpthhtohepghhithesvhhg vghrrdhkvghrnhgvlhdrohhrghdprhgtphhtthhopehgihhtshhtvghrsehpohgsohigrd gtohhm X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: if26b431b:Fastmail Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Mon, 6 Apr 2026 13:36:00 -0400 (EDT) From: Junio C Hamano To: Derrick Stolee Cc: Trieu Huynh , git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [GSoC PATCH] backfill: add --[no-]progress option In-Reply-To: <8db10441-2fce-43ad-bcdc-331d26ec38ed@gmail.com> (Derrick Stolee's message of "Mon, 6 Apr 2026 09:16:30 -0400") References: <20260329152443.525493-1-vikingtc4@gmail.com> <8db10441-2fce-43ad-bcdc-331d26ec38ed@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 06 Apr 2026 10:35:58 -0700 Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Derrick Stolee writes: > On 3/29/2026 11:24 AM, Trieu Huynh wrote: >> 'git backfill' is silent when downloading missing objects, giving >> no feedback during potentially long-running operations on large >> repositories. By contrast, 'git fetch', 'git gc', and >> 'git index-pack' all support --[no-]progress. > > I wouldn't use the word "silent" because the output is actually > quite verbose by default. ;-) > With your patch, I think there would be some extra progress > indicators between these batched fetch requests. >> static void backfill_context_clear(struct backfill_context *ctx) >> @@ -54,6 +57,7 @@ static void download_batch(struct backfill_context *ctx) >> * avoid possible duplicate downloads of the same objects. >> */ >> odb_reprepare(ctx->repo->objects); >> + display_progress(ctx->progress, ++ctx->batches_requested); > > This looks correct. My preference is to not use prefix operators > like this on struct members (it reads like you are incrementing > 'ctx' and not 'batches_requested', even though it is correct). Thanks for paying extra attention to such details. In general, post-increment and pre-decrement are the norm when evaluated in a void context, so the use of pre-increment above violates that norm too. > However, I'm not sure that we want the progress to indicate the > number of _batches_ but instead should be the number of _objects_. True, too. Thanks.