Hi, On Tue, Mar 30, 2021 at 5:17 PM Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > [New Topics] > ... > * en/ort-perf-batch-11 (2021-03-25) 7 commits > - merge-ort, diffcore-rename: employ cached renames when possible > - merge-ort: add helper functions for using cached renames > - merge-ort: preserve cached renames for the appropriate side > - merge-ort: avoid accidental API mis-use > - merge-ort: add code to check for whether cached renames can be reused > - merge-ort: populate caches of rename detection results > - merge-ort: add data structures for in-memory caching of rename detection > (this branch uses en/ort-perf-batch-10, en/ort-perf-batch-9 and en/ort-readiness.) I was actually slightly surprised you picked this one up this early given the other three in-flight. I sent it out for review since folks had reviewed the previous series and discussion on them had been quiet for a while. Please note that there is an issue with this series, as noted at https://lore.kernel.org/git/CABPp-BGrevGj+xrm9bVcX5bp_WRv9cYP+g0hrAtjZK0u=sTHzQ@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/, so even if you merge the other series down, this one needs to be re-rolled at least once first. (I know you normally wouldn't merge quickly, I just wanted to avoid an accidental merge to next based on topic name similarity.) > [Cooking] ... > * en/ort-perf-batch-10 (2021-03-18) 8 commits > - diffcore-rename: determine which relevant_sources are no longer relevant > - merge-ort: record the reason that we want a rename for a file > - diffcore-rename: add computation of number of unknown renames > - diffcore-rename: check if we have enough renames for directories early on > - diffcore-rename: only compute dir_rename_count for relevant directories > - merge-ort: record the reason that we want a rename for a directory > - merge-ort, diffcore-rename: tweak dirs_removed and relevant_source type > - diffcore-rename: take advantage of "majority rules" to skip more renames > (this branch is used by en/ort-perf-batch-11 and en/ort-readiness; uses en/ort-perf-batch-9.) > > I made a mistake of picking these up before they got sufficient > exposure to the reviewers and ended up a source of potential mess > when it turns out that any of the earlier ones need rewriting (I Um...are you by chance conflating my comments linked above on ort-perf-batch-11, the very latest series, with this series? I totally agree that ort-perf-batch-11 is in no state for building upon, hasn't had sufficient review, and even if someone had reviewed it quickly there hasn't been enough time to allow other reviewers to chime in...but I haven't sent any subsequent series based on it. > probably should stop picking up nested series that exceeds reviewer > bandwidth), but how ready is this and subsequent topics? I think ort-perf-batch-9, ort-perf-batch-10, and ort-readiness are all ready to merge to next. All have been reviewed by Stolee to his satisfaction. ort-readiness was also reviewed by Ævar (and used by him in testing one of his series and helped him find a bug). As noted above, ort-perf-batch-11 is not ready; please do not merge that one. > * en/ort-readiness (2021-03-20) 13 commits > - Add testing with merge-ort merge strategy > - t6423: mark remaining expected failure under merge-ort as such > - Revert "merge-ort: ignore the directory rename split conflict for now" > - merge-recursive: add a bunch of FIXME comments documenting known bugs > - merge-ort: write $GIT_DIR/AUTO_MERGE whenever we hit a conflict > - t: mark several submodule merging tests as fixed under merge-ort > - merge-ort: implement CE_SKIP_WORKTREE handling with conflicted entries > - t6428: new test for SKIP_WORKTREE handling and conflicts > - merge-ort: support subtree shifting > - merge-ort: let renormalization change modify/delete into clean delete > - merge-ort: have ll_merge() use a special attr_index for renormalization > - merge-ort: add a special minimal index just for renormalization > - merge-ort: use STABLE_QSORT instead of QSORT where required > (this branch is used by en/ort-perf-batch-11; uses en/ort-perf-batch-10 and en/ort-perf-batch-9.) > > Plug the ort merge backend throughout the rest of the system, and > start testing it as a replacement for the recursive backend. As noted above, this series had two reviewers[1,2]. [1] https://lore.kernel.org/git/87pn09iu3j.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ [2] https://lore.kernel.org/git/4da61e15-a490-673a-ef15-800321ac9eea@xxxxxxxxx/ I'm not aware of any outstanding issues, the reviewers seemed happy as of 2-3 weeks ago, and I haven't heard anyone else chime in so I'm inclined to say this one is ready to merge to next. > * en/ort-perf-batch-9 (2021-03-10) 8 commits > - diffcore-rename: avoid doing basename comparisons for irrelevant sources > - merge-ort: skip rename detection entirely if possible > - merge-ort: use relevant_sources to filter possible rename sources > - merge-ort: precompute whether directory rename detection is needed > - merge-ort: introduce wrappers for alternate tree traversal > - merge-ort: add data structures for an alternate tree traversal > - merge-ort: precompute subset of sources for which we need rename detection > - diffcore-rename: enable filtering possible rename sources > (this branch is used by en/ort-perf-batch-10, en/ort-perf-batch-11 and en/ort-readiness.) > > The ort merge backend has been optimized by skipping irrelevant > renames. > > Will merge to 'next'. Thanks, sounds good.
