Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] git-svn: allow git-svn fetching to work using serf

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

 



On Jul 18, 2013, at 12:29, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
(cc-ing Eric Wong, who maintains git-svn and knows both it and
the libsvn perl bindings much better than I do)
Kyle J. McKay wrote:

David Rothenberger <daveroth@xxxxxxx> has determined the cause to
be that ra_serf does not drive the delta editor in a depth-first
manner [...]. Instead, the calls come in this order:

Thanks.

Sorry to nitpick, but the problem is not depth-first versus
breadth-first versus random.  Blaming the traversal order makes this
completely confusing.  The actual problem is that the driver asks us
to keep multiple files open at a time.

On Sun, 07 Jul 2013 18:00:40 GMT, Branko Čibej wrote:
On 07.07.2013 19:40, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
(cc-ing subversion's users@ list for advice)
Kyle McKay wrote:
On Jul 6, 2013, at 18:37, Jonathan Nieder wrote:


Kyle McKay wrote:
Begin forwarded message:
[2] http://subversion.tigris.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=2932

Ah, thanks for the context.

It's still not clear to me how we know that ra_serf driving the editor in a non depth-first manner is the problem here. Has that explanation
been confirmed somehow?
[...]
Since ra_serf makes multiple connections to the server (hard-coded
to 4 prior to svn 1.8, defaults to 4 in svn 1.8 but can be set to
between 1 and 8) it makes sense there would be multiple active calls
to apply_textdelta if processing is done as results are received on
the multiple connections.
Ah, that's worrisome. Do I understand you correctly that to work with
ra_serf in skelta mode, callers need to make their apply_textdelta
callback thread-safe?

No; the editor drive is single-threaded, but the order of the operations
isn't strictly depth-first.


Brane also describes this as a non-depth-first traversal order which is the root of the problem. If the order of operations were strictly depth-first, the previous file would end up being closed before the next one's opened.

The approach taken in this patch would be racy if the driver calls us
multiple times concurrently (since temp_acquire can fail).  I believe
it doesn't but haven't checked.

Brane says the editor drive is single-threaded so that doesn't seem like a problem.

--
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]