Re: [PATCH v3 0/2] read-cache: call verify_hdr() in a background thread

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

 





On 3/28/2017 3:16 PM, Jeff King wrote:
On Tue, Mar 28, 2017 at 07:07:30PM +0000, git@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

From: Jeff Hostetler <jeffhost@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Version 3 of this patch series simplifies this effort to just turn
on/off the hash verification using a "core.checksumindex" config variable.

I've preserved the original checksum validation code so that we can
force it on in fsck if desired.

It eliminates the original threading model completely.

Jeff Hostetler (2):
  read-cache: core.checksumindex
  test-core-checksum-index: core.checksumindex test helper

 Makefile                            |  1 +
 read-cache.c                        | 12 ++++++
 t/helper/.gitignore                 |  1 +
 t/helper/test-core-checksum-index.c | 77 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Do we still need test-core-checksum-index? Can we just time ls-files or
something in t/perf?

It was a convenient way to isolate, average, and compare
read_index() times, but I suppose we could do something
like that.

I did confirm that a ls-files does show a slight 0.008
second difference on the 58K file Linux tree when toggled
on or off.

But I'm tempted to suggest that we just omit my helper exe
and not worry about a test -- since we don't have any test
repos large enough to really demonstrate the differences.
My concern is that that 0.008 would be lost in the noise
of the rest of the test and make for an unreliable result.

Jeff



[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]