Re: [PATCH 0/6] Yet another approach to handling empty snapshots

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

 



On Wed, Jan 24, 2018 at 12:14:10PM +0100, Michael Haggerty wrote:

> This patch series fixes the handling of empty packed-refs snapshots
> (i.e., those with `snapshot->buf` and friends equal to `NULL`), partly
> by changing `snapshot` to store a pointer to the start of the
> post-header `packed-refs` content instead of `header_len`. It makes a
> couple of other improvements as well.
> 
> I'm not sure whether I like this approach better than the alternative
> of always setting `snapshot->buf` to a non-NULL value, by allocating a
> length-1 bit of RAM if necessary. The latter is less intrusive, though
> even if that approach is taken, I think patches 01, 02, and 04 from
> this patch series would be worthwhile improvements.

This looks good to me. I agree that 1, 2, and 4 are improvements
regardless (but 4 as it is now depends on 3, right?).

I don't have a strong opinion between this series and the other options
presented. It's probably not worth agonizing over, so we should pick one
and move on.

-Peff



[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