Re: [PATCH 1/2] rm: only refresh entries that we may touch

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy  <pclouds@xxxxxxxxx> writes:

> diff --git a/builtin-rm.c b/builtin-rm.c
> index 57975db..4cac3d1 100644
> --- a/builtin-rm.c
> +++ b/builtin-rm.c
> @@ -169,7 +169,6 @@ int cmd_rm(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix)
>  
>  	if (read_cache() < 0)
>  		die("index file corrupt");
> -	refresh_cache(REFRESH_QUIET);
>  
>  	pathspec = get_pathspec(prefix, argv);
>  	seen = NULL;
> @@ -181,6 +180,7 @@ int cmd_rm(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix)
>  		struct cache_entry *ce = active_cache[i];
>  		if (!match_pathspec(pathspec, ce->name, ce_namelen(ce), 0, seen))
>  			continue;
> +		refresh_cache_entry(ce, 1);

Why does this pass "1" instead of "0"?  The existing code does not give
refresh_cache() REFRESH_REALLY bit, and a patch that is marked as a pure
optimization should pass 0.  If you really mean it, please spell it as
CE_MATCH_IGNORE_VALID and justify why it is a good change in a separate
patch.

Thanks.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]