Matheus Tavares Bernardino <matheus.bernardino@xxxxxx> writes: > I was looking further at this code and noticed that the conditions > under which we fstat() (or lstat()) an entry are slightly different > throughout entry.c: > > - In write_entry()'s footer, we call lstat() iff stat->refresh_cache. > - In write_entry()'s `write_file_entry` label, we call fstat_output() > when !to_tempfile. > - In streaming_write_entry() we call fstat_output() without checking > if !to_tempfile. > - And, finally, in fstat_output() itself, we check > `state->refresh_cache && !state->base_dir_len`. > > I understand we always check state->refresh_cache to avoid getting > stat information we won't really need later, as we are not updating > the index. But why do we check !to_tempfile and !state->base_dir_len? > Doesn't writing to a tempfile or using a checkout prefix already imply > !state->refresh_cache? You can easily blame the code back to e4c72923 (write_entry(): use fstat() instead of lstat() when file is open, 2009-02-09). Back then, only a single place assigned 0 to state.refresh_cache and that is in "checkout-index" with either base_dir_len or to_tempfile set. I do not remember, and I am fairly sure Stolee does not remember either. If I have to guess, this was done merely to be extra cautious, perhaps? As refresh_cache bit is checked first, check for !to_tempfile and !base_dir_len would be dead at best and redundant at worst.
