git.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
To: "Neeraj Singh via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@gmail.com>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, rsbecker@nexbridge.com,
	bagasdotme@gmail.com, newren@gmail.com, avarab@gmail.com,
	nksingh85@gmail.com, ps@pks.im, sandals@crustytoothpaste.net,
	"Neeraj K. Singh" <neerajsi@microsoft.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 3/5] core.fsync: introduce granular fsync control
Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2022 16:21:08 -0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <xmqqo82eirnv.fsf@gitster.g> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <e31886717b42837f4e1538a13c8954aa07865af5.1646866998.git.gitgitgadget@gmail.com> (Neeraj Singh via GitGitGadget's message of "Wed, 09 Mar 2022 23:03:16 +0000")

"Neeraj Singh via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@gmail.com> writes:

> +/*
> + * These values are used to help identify parts of a repository to fsync.
> + * FSYNC_COMPONENT_NONE identifies data that will not be a persistent part of the
> + * repository and so shouldn't be fsynced.
> + */
> +enum fsync_component {
> +	FSYNC_COMPONENT_NONE,
> +	FSYNC_COMPONENT_LOOSE_OBJECT		= 1 << 0,
> +	FSYNC_COMPONENT_PACK			= 1 << 1,
> +	FSYNC_COMPONENT_PACK_METADATA		= 1 << 2,
> +	FSYNC_COMPONENT_COMMIT_GRAPH		= 1 << 3,
> +};

OK, so the idea is that Patrick's "we need to fsync refs" will be
done by adding a new component to this list, and sprinkling a call
to fsync_component_or_die() in the code of ref-files backend?

I am wondering if fsync_or_die() interface is abstracted well
enough, or we need things like "the fd is inside this directory; in
addition to doing the fsync of the fd, please sync the parent
directory as well" support before we start adding more components
(if there is such a need, perhaps it comes before this step).

> +#define FSYNC_COMPONENTS_DEFAULT (FSYNC_COMPONENT_PACK | \
> +				  FSYNC_COMPONENT_PACK_METADATA | \
> +				  FSYNC_COMPONENT_COMMIT_GRAPH)

IOW, everything other than loose object, which already has a
separate core.fsyncObjectFiles knob to loosen.  Everything else we
currently sync unconditionally and the default keeps that
arrangement?

> +static inline void fsync_component_or_die(enum fsync_component component, int fd, const char *msg)
> +{
> +	if (fsync_components & component)
> +		fsync_or_die(fd, msg);
> +}

Do we have a compelling reason to have this as a static inline
function?  We are talking about concluding an I/O operation and
I doubt there is a good performance argument for it.

> +static const struct fsync_component_entry {
> +	const char *name;
> +	enum fsync_component component_bits;
> +} fsync_component_table[] = {

thing[] is an array of "thing" (and thing[4] is the "fourth" such
thing), but this is not an array of a table (it is a name-to-bit
mapping).

I wonder if this array works without "_table" suffix in its name.

> +	{ "loose-object", FSYNC_COMPONENT_LOOSE_OBJECT },
> +	{ "pack", FSYNC_COMPONENT_PACK },
> +	{ "pack-metadata", FSYNC_COMPONENT_PACK_METADATA },
> +	{ "commit-graph", FSYNC_COMPONENT_COMMIT_GRAPH },
> +};
> +
> +static enum fsync_component parse_fsync_components(const char *var, const char *string)
> +{
> +	enum fsync_component output = 0;
> +
> +	if (!strcmp(string, "none"))
> +		return FSYNC_COMPONENT_NONE;
> +
> +	while (string) {
> +		int i;
> +		size_t len;
> +		const char *ep;
> +		int negated = 0;
> +		int found = 0;
> +
> +		string = string + strspn(string, ", \t\n\r");
> +		ep = strchrnul(string, ',');
> +		len = ep - string;
> +
> +		if (*string == '-') {
> +			negated = 1;
> +			string++;
> +			len--;
> +			if (!len)
> +				warning(_("invalid value for variable %s"), var);
> +		}
> +
> +		if (!len)
> +			break;
> +
> +		for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(fsync_component_table); ++i) {
> +			const struct fsync_component_entry *entry = &fsync_component_table[i];
> +
> +			if (strncmp(entry->name, string, len))
> +				continue;
> +
> +			found = 1;
> +			if (negated)
> +				output &= ~entry->component_bits;
> +			else
> +				output |= entry->component_bits;
> +		}
> +
> +		if (!found) {
> +			char *component = xstrndup(string, len);
> +			warning(_("ignoring unknown core.fsync component '%s'"), component);
> +			free(component);
> +		}
> +
> +		string = ep;
> +	}
> +
> +	return output;
> +}

Hmph.  I would have expected, with built-in default of
pack,pack-metadata,commit-graph,

 - "none,pack" would choose only "pack" by first clearing the
   built-in default (or whatever was set in configuration files that
   are lower precedence than what we are reading) and then OR'ing
   the "pack" bit in.

 - "-pack" would choose "pack-metadata,commit-graph" by first
   starting from the built-in default and then CLR'ing the "pack"
   bit out.  If there were already changes made by the lower
   precedence configuration files like /etc/gitconfig, the result
   might be different and the only definite thing we can say is that
   the pack bit is cleared.

 - "loose-object" would choose all of the bits by first starting
   from the built-in default and then OR'ing the "loose-object" bit
   in.

Otherwise, parsing "none" is more or less pointless, as the above
parser always start from 0 and OR's in or CLR's out the named bit.
Whoever writes "none" can just write an empty string, no?

I wonder you'd rather want to do it this way?

parse_fsync_components(var, value, current) {
	enum fsync_component positive = 0, negative = 0;

	while (string) {
		int negated = 0;
		enum fsync_component bits;

		parse out a single component into <negated, bits>;

		if (bits == 0) { /* "none" given */
                	current = 0;
		} else if (negated) {
			negative |= bits;
		} else {
			positive |= bits;
		}
		advance <string> pointer;
	}

	return (current | positive) & ~negative;
}

And then ...

> +	if (!strcmp(var, "core.fsync")) {
> +		if (!value)
> +			return config_error_nonbool(var);
> +		fsync_components = parse_fsync_components(var, value);
> +		return 0;
> +	}
> +

... this part would pass the current value of fsync_components as
the third parameter to the parse_fsync_components().  The variable
would be initialized to the FSYNC_COMPONENTS_DEFAULT we saw earlier.


> @@ -1613,7 +1684,7 @@ static int git_default_core_config(const char *var, const char *value, void *cb)
>  	}
>  
>  	if (!strcmp(var, "core.fsyncobjectfiles")) {
> -		fsync_object_files = git_config_bool(var, value);
> +		warning(_("core.fsyncobjectfiles is deprecated; use core.fsync instead"));

This is not deprecating but removing the support, which I am not
sure is a sensible thing to do.  Rather we should pretend that
core.fsync = "loose-object" (or "-loose-object") were found in the
configuration, shouldn't we?


  reply	other threads:[~2022-03-10  0:21 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 122+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-12-04  3:28 [PATCH 0/2] A design for future-proofing fsync() configuration Neeraj K. Singh via GitGitGadget
2021-12-04  3:28 ` [PATCH 1/2] fsync: add writeout-only mode for fsyncing repo data Neeraj Singh via GitGitGadget
2021-12-06  7:54   ` Neeraj Singh
2021-12-04  3:28 ` [PATCH 2/2] core.fsync: introduce granular fsync control Neeraj Singh via GitGitGadget
2021-12-07  2:46 ` [PATCH v2 0/3] A design for future-proofing fsync() configuration Neeraj K. Singh via GitGitGadget
2021-12-07  2:46   ` [PATCH v2 1/3] core.fsyncmethod: add writeout-only mode Neeraj Singh via GitGitGadget
2021-12-07 11:44     ` Patrick Steinhardt
2021-12-07 12:14       ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2021-12-07 23:29       ` Neeraj Singh
2021-12-07 12:18     ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2021-12-07 23:58       ` Neeraj Singh
2021-12-07  2:46   ` [PATCH v2 2/3] core.fsync: introduce granular fsync control Neeraj Singh via GitGitGadget
2021-12-07 11:53     ` Patrick Steinhardt
2021-12-07 20:46       ` Neeraj Singh
2021-12-07 12:29     ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2021-12-07 21:44       ` Neeraj Singh
2021-12-08 10:05         ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2021-12-09  0:14           ` Neeraj Singh
2021-12-09  0:44             ` Junio C Hamano
2021-12-09  4:08             ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2021-12-09  6:18               ` Neeraj Singh
2022-01-18 23:50                 ` Neeraj Singh
2022-01-19 15:28                   ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2022-01-19 14:52                 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2022-01-28  1:28                   ` Neeraj Singh
2021-12-07  2:46   ` [PATCH v2 3/3] core.fsync: new option to harden the index Neeraj Singh via GitGitGadget
2021-12-07 11:56   ` [PATCH v2 0/3] A design for future-proofing fsync() configuration Patrick Steinhardt
2021-12-08  0:44     ` Neeraj Singh
2021-12-09  0:57   ` [PATCH v3 0/4] " Neeraj K. Singh via GitGitGadget
2021-12-09  0:57     ` [PATCH v3 1/4] core.fsyncmethod: add writeout-only mode Neeraj Singh via GitGitGadget
2021-12-09  0:57     ` [PATCH v3 2/4] core.fsync: introduce granular fsync control Neeraj Singh via GitGitGadget
2021-12-09  0:57     ` [PATCH v3 3/4] core.fsync: new option to harden the index Neeraj Singh via GitGitGadget
2021-12-09  0:57     ` [PATCH v3 4/4] core.fsync: add a `derived-metadata` aggregate option Neeraj Singh via GitGitGadget
2022-01-08  1:13     ` [PATCH v3 0/4] A design for future-proofing fsync() configuration Neeraj Singh
2022-01-09  0:55       ` rsbecker
2022-01-10 19:00         ` Neeraj Singh
2022-02-01  3:33     ` [PATCH v4 " Neeraj K. Singh via GitGitGadget
2022-02-01  3:33       ` [PATCH v4 1/4] core.fsyncmethod: add writeout-only mode Neeraj Singh via GitGitGadget
2022-02-01  3:33       ` [PATCH v4 2/4] core.fsync: introduce granular fsync control Neeraj Singh via GitGitGadget
2022-02-02  0:51         ` Junio C Hamano
2022-02-02  1:42           ` Junio C Hamano
2022-02-11 21:18             ` Neeraj Singh
2022-02-11 22:19               ` Junio C Hamano
2022-02-11 23:04                 ` Neeraj Singh
2022-02-11 23:15                   ` Junio C Hamano
2022-02-12  0:39                     ` rsbecker
2022-02-14  7:04                     ` Patrick Steinhardt
2022-02-14 17:17                       ` Junio C Hamano
2022-03-09 13:42                         ` Patrick Steinhardt
2022-03-09 18:50                           ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2022-03-09 20:03                           ` Junio C Hamano
2022-03-10 12:33                             ` Patrick Steinhardt
2022-03-10 17:15                               ` Junio C Hamano
2022-03-09 20:05                           ` Neeraj Singh
2022-02-11 20:38           ` Neeraj Singh
2022-02-01  3:33       ` [PATCH v4 3/4] core.fsync: new option to harden the index Neeraj Singh via GitGitGadget
2022-02-01  3:33       ` [PATCH v4 4/4] core.fsync: add a `derived-metadata` aggregate option Neeraj Singh via GitGitGadget
2022-03-09 23:03       ` [PATCH v5 0/5] A design for future-proofing fsync() configuration Neeraj K. Singh via GitGitGadget
2022-03-09 23:03         ` [PATCH v5 1/5] wrapper: move inclusion of CSPRNG headers the wrapper.c file Neeraj Singh via GitGitGadget
2022-03-09 23:29           ` Junio C Hamano
2022-03-10  1:21             ` Neeraj Singh
2022-03-10  1:26           ` brian m. carlson
2022-03-10  1:56             ` Neeraj Singh
2022-03-09 23:03         ` [PATCH v5 2/5] core.fsyncmethod: add writeout-only mode Neeraj Singh via GitGitGadget
2022-03-09 23:48           ` Junio C Hamano
2022-03-09 23:03         ` [PATCH v5 3/5] core.fsync: introduce granular fsync control Neeraj Singh via GitGitGadget
2022-03-10  0:21           ` Junio C Hamano [this message]
2022-03-10  2:53             ` Neeraj Singh
2022-03-10  7:19               ` Junio C Hamano
2022-03-10 18:38                 ` Neeraj Singh
2022-03-10 18:44                   ` Junio C Hamano
2022-03-10 19:57                     ` Junio C Hamano
2022-03-10 20:25                       ` Neeraj Singh
2022-03-10 21:17                         ` Junio C Hamano
2022-03-10 13:11               ` Johannes Schindelin
2022-03-10 17:18               ` Junio C Hamano
2022-03-09 23:03         ` [PATCH v5 4/5] core.fsync: new option to harden the index Neeraj Singh via GitGitGadget
2022-03-09 23:03         ` [PATCH v5 5/5] core.fsync: documentation and user-friendly aggregate options Neeraj Singh via GitGitGadget
2022-03-10  9:53         ` Future-proofed syncing of refs Patrick Steinhardt
2022-03-10  9:53         ` [PATCH 6/8] core.fsync: add `fsync_component()` wrapper which doesn't die Patrick Steinhardt
2022-03-10 17:34           ` Junio C Hamano
2022-03-10 18:40             ` Neeraj Singh
2022-03-10  9:53         ` [PATCH 7/8] core.fsync: new option to harden loose references Patrick Steinhardt
2022-03-10 18:25           ` Junio C Hamano
2022-03-10 19:03             ` Neeraj Singh
2022-03-10 22:54           ` Neeraj Singh
2022-03-11  6:40           ` Junio C Hamano
2022-03-11  9:15             ` Patrick Steinhardt
2022-03-11  9:36               ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2022-03-10  9:53         ` [PATCH 8/8] core.fsync: new option to harden packed references Patrick Steinhardt
2022-03-10 18:28           ` Junio C Hamano
2022-03-11  9:10             ` Patrick Steinhardt
2022-03-10 22:43         ` [PATCH v6 0/6] A design for future-proofing fsync() configuration Neeraj K. Singh via GitGitGadget
2022-03-10 22:43           ` [PATCH v6 1/6] wrapper: make inclusion of Windows csprng header tightly scoped Neeraj Singh via GitGitGadget
2022-03-10 22:43           ` [PATCH v6 2/6] core.fsyncmethod: add writeout-only mode Neeraj Singh via GitGitGadget
2022-03-10 22:43           ` [PATCH v6 3/6] core.fsync: introduce granular fsync control infrastructure Neeraj Singh via GitGitGadget
2022-03-10 22:43           ` [PATCH v6 4/6] core.fsync: add configuration parsing Neeraj Singh via GitGitGadget
2022-03-28 11:06             ` Jiang Xin
2022-03-28 19:45               ` Neeraj Singh
2022-03-10 22:43           ` [PATCH v6 5/6] core.fsync: new option to harden the index Neeraj Singh via GitGitGadget
2022-03-10 22:43           ` [PATCH v6 6/6] core.fsync: documentation and user-friendly aggregate options Neeraj Singh via GitGitGadget
2022-03-15 19:12             ` [PATCH v7] " Neeraj Singh
2022-03-15 19:32               ` Junio C Hamano
2022-03-15 19:56                 ` Neeraj Singh
2022-03-23 14:20               ` do we have too much fsync() configuration in 'next'? (was: [PATCH v7] core.fsync: documentation and user-friendly aggregate options) Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2022-03-25 21:24                 ` Neeraj Singh
2022-03-26  0:24                   ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2022-03-26  1:23                     ` do we have too much fsync() configuration in 'next'? Junio C Hamano
2022-03-26  1:25                     ` do we have too much fsync() configuration in 'next'? (was: [PATCH v7] core.fsync: documentation and user-friendly aggregate options) Neeraj Singh
2022-03-26 15:31                       ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2022-03-27  5:27                         ` Neeraj Singh
2022-03-27 12:43                           ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2022-03-28 10:56                             ` Patrick Steinhardt
2022-03-28 11:25                               ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2022-03-28 19:56                                 ` Neeraj Singh
2022-03-30 16:59                                   ` Neeraj Singh
2022-03-10 23:34           ` [PATCH v6 0/6] A design for future-proofing fsync() configuration Junio C Hamano
2022-03-11  0:03             ` Neeraj Singh
2022-03-11 18:50               ` Neeraj Singh
2022-03-13 23:50             ` Junio C Hamano
2022-03-11  9:58           ` [PATCH v2] core.fsync: new option to harden references Patrick Steinhardt
2022-03-25  6:11             ` SZEDER Gábor

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=xmqqo82eirnv.fsf@gitster.g \
    --to=gitster@pobox.com \
    --cc=avarab@gmail.com \
    --cc=bagasdotme@gmail.com \
    --cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=gitgitgadget@gmail.com \
    --cc=neerajsi@microsoft.com \
    --cc=newren@gmail.com \
    --cc=nksingh85@gmail.com \
    --cc=ps@pks.im \
    --cc=rsbecker@nexbridge.com \
    --cc=sandals@crustytoothpaste.net \
    /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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).