On Wed, 28 Feb 2018 15:22:37 -0800
Brandon Williams <bmwill@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> + output = *section
> + section = (acknowledgments | packfile)
> + (flush-pkt | delim-pkt)
> +
> + acknowledgments = PKT-LINE("acknowledgments" LF)
> + (nak | *ack)
> + (ready)
> + ready = PKT-LINE("ready" LF)
> + nak = PKT-LINE("NAK" LF)
> + ack = PKT-LINE("ACK" SP obj-id LF)
> +
> + packfile = PKT-LINE("packfile" LF)
> + [PACKFILE]
I should have noticed this earlier, but "PACKFILE" is not defined anywhere -
it's probably better written as:
*PKT-LINE(%x01-03 *%x00-ff)"
or something like that.
> + acknowledgments section
> + * Always begins with the section header "acknowledgments"
> +
> + * The server will respond with "NAK" if none of the object ids sent
> + as have lines were common.
> +
> + * The server will respond with "ACK obj-id" for all of the
> + object ids sent as have lines which are common.
> +
> + * A response cannot have both "ACK" lines as well as a "NAK"
> + line.
> +
> + * The server will respond with a "ready" line indicating that
> + the server has found an acceptable common base and is ready to
> + make and send a packfile (which will be found in the packfile
> + section of the same response)
> +
> + * If the client determines that it is finished with negotiations
> + by sending a "done" line, the acknowledgments sections MUST be
> + omitted from the server's response.
> +
> + * If the server has found a suitable cut point and has decided
> + to send a "ready" line, then the server can decide to (as an
> + optimization) omit any "ACK" lines it would have sent during
> + its response. This is because the server will have already
> + determined the objects it plans to send to the client and no
> + further negotiation is needed.
> +
> +----
> + packfile section
> + * Always begins with the section header "packfile"
> +
> + * The transmission of the packfile begins immediately after the
> + section header
> +
> + * The data transfer of the packfile is always multiplexed, using
> + the same semantics of the 'side-band-64k' capability from
> + protocol version 1. This means that each packet, during the
> + packfile data stream, is made up of a leading 4-byte pkt-line
> + length (typical of the pkt-line format), followed by a 1-byte
> + stream code, followed by the actual data.
> +
> + The stream code can be one of:
> + 1 - pack data
> + 2 - progress messages
> + 3 - fatal error message just before stream aborts
> +
> + * This section is only included if the client has sent 'want'
> + lines in its request and either requested that no more
> + negotiation be done by sending 'done' or if the server has
> + decided it has found a sufficient cut point to produce a
> + packfile.
For both the sections, I think that the conditions for
inclusion/non-inclusion ("This section is only included if...") should
be the first point.
> +static void upload_pack_data_init(struct upload_pack_data *data)
> +{
> + struct object_array wants = OBJECT_ARRAY_INIT;
> + struct oid_array haves = OID_ARRAY_INIT;
> +
> + memset(data, 0, sizeof(*data));
> + data->wants = wants;
> + data->haves = haves;
> +}
Any reason to use a initializer function instead of a static literal?
