On Mon, Feb 19, 2024 at 04:04:16PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Patrick Steinhardt <ps@xxxxxx> writes: > > > We use a directory iterator to return reflogs via the reflog iterator. > > This iterator returns entries in the same order as readdir(3P) would and > > will thus yield reflogs with no discernible order. > > > > Set the new `DIR_ITERATOR_SORTED` flag that was introduced in the > > preceding commit so that the order is deterministic. While the effect of > > this can only been observed in a test tool, a subsequent commit will > > start to expose this functionality to users via a new `git reflog list` > > subcommand. > > > > Signed-off-by: Patrick Steinhardt <ps@xxxxxx> > > --- > > refs/files-backend.c | 4 ++-- > > t/t0600-reffiles-backend.sh | 4 ++-- > > t/t1405-main-ref-store.sh | 2 +- > > t/t1406-submodule-ref-store.sh | 2 +- > > 4 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) > > > > diff --git a/refs/files-backend.c b/refs/files-backend.c > > index 75dcc21ecb..2ffc63185f 100644 > > --- a/refs/files-backend.c > > +++ b/refs/files-backend.c > > @@ -2193,7 +2193,7 @@ static struct ref_iterator *reflog_iterator_begin(struct ref_store *ref_store, > > > > strbuf_addf(&sb, "%s/logs", gitdir); > > > > - diter = dir_iterator_begin(sb.buf, 0); > > + diter = dir_iterator_begin(sb.buf, DIR_ITERATOR_SORTED); > > if (!diter) { > > strbuf_release(&sb); > > return empty_ref_iterator_begin(); > > @@ -2202,7 +2202,7 @@ static struct ref_iterator *reflog_iterator_begin(struct ref_store *ref_store, > > CALLOC_ARRAY(iter, 1); > > ref_iterator = &iter->base; > > > > - base_ref_iterator_init(ref_iterator, &files_reflog_iterator_vtable, 0); > > + base_ref_iterator_init(ref_iterator, &files_reflog_iterator_vtable, 1); > > This caught my attention. Once we apply this patch, the only way > base_ref_iterator_init() can receive 0 for its last parameter > (i.e. 'ordered') is via the merge_ref_iterator_begin() call in > files_reflog_iterator_begin() that passes 0 as 'ordered'. If we > force files_reflog_iterator_begin() to ask for an ordered > merge_ref_iterator, then we will have no unordered ref iterators. > Am I reading the code right? Ah, true indeed. The "files" reflog iterator was the only remaining iterator that wasn't ordered. I'll include an additional patch on top that drops the `ordered` bit altogether. Patrick
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature