On Wed, 2014-05-14 at 05:54 +0700, Duy Nguyen wrote: > On Wed, May 14, 2014 at 5:38 AM, David Turner <dturner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Mon, 2014-05-12 at 17:45 +0700, Duy Nguyen wrote: > >> This is your quote from above, moved down a bit: > >> > >> > update_fs_cache should only have to update based on what it has learned > >> > from watchman. So if no .gitignore has been changed, it should not have > >> > to do very much work. > >> > > >> > I could take the fe_excluded check and move it above the > >> > last_exclude_matching check in fs_cache_is_excluded; it causes t7300 to > >> > fail when run under watchman but presumably that's fixable > >> > >> So you exclude files early and make the real read_directory() pass do > >> pretty much nothing. This is probably not a good idea. Assume that I > >> touch $TOP/.gitignore then do something other than "git status" (or > >> "git add") then I have to pay read_directory() cost. > > > > I'm not sure I understand this. read_directory does something: it checks > > the fs_cache (instead of the filesystem) for untracked files. > > A lot of commands do read_cache() that that eventually calls > update_fs_cache, which does part of read_directory's work (the > fe_excluded thing). But not many of those commands actually call > read_directory(). It'd better if there's a way to mark that "this > .gitignore is changed", but delay the actual exclude processsing until > we are sure read_directory() will be used. OK, that would be straighforward, I think. -- 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