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

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

 



Michael Haggerty <mhagger@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> 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.

I do not have a strong preference either way, but somehow feel that
this is more "coherent" ;-)  That is certainly subjective, though.

Thanks.



[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