Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
>> +static struct fetch_task *
>> +get_fetch_task_from_changed(struct submodule_parallel_fetch *spf,
>> + const char **default_argv, struct strbuf *err)
>> +{
>
>> @@ -1553,7 +1628,10 @@ static int get_next_submodule(struct child_process *cp, struct strbuf *err,
>> {
>> struct submodule_parallel_fetch *spf = data;
>> const char *default_argv = NULL;
>> - struct fetch_task *task = get_fetch_task(spf, &default_argv, err);
>> + struct fetch_task *task =
>> + get_fetch_task_from_index(spf, &default_argv, err);
>> + if (!task)
>> + task = get_fetch_task_from_changed(spf, &default_argv, err);
>
> Hmph, intersting. So if "from index" grabbed some submodules
> already, then the "from the changes in the superproject, we know
> these submodules need refreshing" is not happen at all? I am afraid
> that I am still not following this...
Hm, perhaps the following will help:
- get_next_submodule() is an iterator, specifically, it is a
get_next_task_fn passed to run_processes_parallel_tr2(). It gets
called until it is exhausted.
- Since get_next_submodule() is an iterator, I've implemented
get_fetch_task_from_index() and get_fetch_task_from_changed() as
iterators (they return NULL when they are exhausted).
So in practice:
- We repeatedly call get_next_submodule(), which tries to get a fetch
task by calling the get_fetch_task_* functions.
- If get_fetch_task_from_index() returns non-NULL, get_next_submodule()
uses that fetch task.
- Eventually, we will have considered every submodule in the index. At
that point, get_fetch_task_from_index() is exhausted and always
returns NULL.
- Since get_fetch_task_from_index() returns NULL, get_next_submodule()
now gets its fetch tasks from get_fetch_task_from_changed().
- Eventually, we will also have considered every changed submodule, and
get_fetch_task_from_changed() is exhausted.
- get_next_submodule() has now been exhausted and we are done.
As for the other questions, I'll dig a bit deeper before getting back to
you with answers.
