Re: [PATCH 1/5] refs: introduce missing functions that accept a `struct ref_store`

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Patrick Steinhardt <ps@xxxxxx> writes:

> While most of the functions in "refs.h" have a variant that accepts a
> `struct ref_store`, some don't. Callers of these functions are thus
> forced to implicitly rely on `the_repository` to figure out the ref
> store that is to be used.
>
> Introduce those missing functions to address this shortcoming.
>
> Signed-off-by: Patrick Steinhardt <ps@xxxxxx>
> ---
>  refs.c | 65 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------
>  refs.h | 13 ++++++++++++
>  2 files changed, 64 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)

This will eventually allow us to even use an independent ref_store
that is not tied to a repository, but the huge patch we see later
will just force all the callers to call get_main_ref_store() on
the_repository before calling these functions, so while the whole
thing looks scary huge and noisy, there aren't all that much risky
going on in this series.

Looking good.





[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]

  Powered by Linux