Re: [PATCH] commit: don't rewrite shared index unnecessarily

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

 



Duy Nguyen <pclouds@xxxxxxxxx> writes:

> On Fri, Aug 28, 2015 at 12:07 AM, David Turner <dturner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Remove a cache invalidation which would cause the shared index to be
>> rewritten on as-is commits.
>>
>> When the cache-tree has changed, we need to update it.  But we don't
>> necessarily need to update the shared index.  So setting
>> active_cache_changed to SOMETHING_CHANGED is unnecessary.  Instead, we
>> let update_main_cache_tree just update the CACHE_TREE_CHANGED bit.
>>
>> In order to test this, make test-dump-split-index not segfault on
>> missing replace_bitmap/delete_bitmap.  This new codepath is not called
>> now that the test passes, but is necessary to avoid a segfault when the
>> new test is run with the old builtin/commit.c code.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: David Turner <dturner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> Ack.
>
> I made SOMETHING_CHANGED "1" for catching these cases (there were a
> few on-flight topics when this series was being cooked and I was
> afraid I could not cache all active_cache_changed sites).

Thanks.

>> ---
>>
>> I introduced this bug last year while improving the cache-tree code.
>> I guess I probably didn't notice that active_cache_changed wasn't a
>> boolean.
>
> So.. you did you split-index? Cool. Never heard anyone using it for
> real. It needs the other part to improve reading/refresh side to get
> to full potential though..

;-)
--
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]