Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes:
> Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx>
> ---
> This was another patch from late in the freeze period. It was in
> response to a user getting confused about why rename detection wasn't
> happening in a large merge. Is it appropriate to print this for every
> rename we try? Or should it just be for merges?
>
> Perhaps we should also bump the default limit from 100, which I think
> was just arbitrarily chosen.
> ...
> + if ((num_create > rename_limit && num_src > rename_limit) ||
> + (num_create * num_src > rename_limit * rename_limit)) {
> + warning("too many files, skipping inexact rename detection");
> goto cleanup;
> + }
>
> mx = xmalloc(sizeof(*mx) * num_create * num_src);
> for (dst_cnt = i = 0; i < rename_dst_nr; i++) {
This reminds me of the 6d24ad9 (Optimize rename detection for a huge diff)
topic that reduces the above allocation greatly. Some benching with the
patch may prove useful to establish much higher limits, I suspect.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
