Re: [PATCH v2 3/4] Integrate hash algorithm support with repo setup

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

 



On Mon, Oct 30, 2017 at 11:13:41AM +0900, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Is the plan to allow running with multiple hash algorithms in
> parallel?  I thought what we want to see in the future codebase was
> to have the default hash algorithm used for everything except for a
> select few codepaths, and assumed that the way we achieve it is to
> 
>  - allow very low level helper functions (e.g. read_sha1_file(),
>    write_sha1_file_prepare(), etc.) to take a pointer to the hash
>    algorithm structure;
> 
>  - have higher level helper functions to call these low level
>    helpers with a fixed singleton instance of hash algorithm
>    structure that represents that default one (SHA2-something?); and
> 
>  - a few selected codepaths (e.g. index-pack that reads SHA-1 stream
>    and converts it into NewHash pack/index while building the object
>    name mapping) use an additional singleton instance of hash
>    algorithm structure that represents the SHA-1 hash, and the way
>    they use it is *NOT* by replacing "the current" one with SHA-1,
>    but by explicitly passing the instance to the low level helpers
>    as parameter.

This is consistent with my understanding as well.

> So, "current" does indeed sound quite wrong, as it makes it sound as
> if you can swap it anytime and ask "which one is in effect now?".
> If we do not want to call the default instance "SHA-2" because we
> want to prepare for migrating again by not having the name of a
> concrete hash algorithm sprinkled in the codebase all over like we
> currently do, why not call the instance "the_hash_algo"?

My original plan was to handle different algorithms in different
submodules, but I think with the current transition plan, that becomes
unnecessary, since we're going to paper over any differences that might
show up.  the_hash_algo should be fine, and it's consistent with
the_repository and the_index as well.

Thanks for a sensible suggestion.
-- 
brian m. carlson / brian with sandals: Houston, Texas, US
https://www.crustytoothpaste.net/~bmc | My opinion only
OpenPGP: https://keybase.io/bk2204

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


[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]

  Powered by Linux