Re: [PATCH] Introduce get_octopus_merge_bases() in commit.c

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

 



Hi,

On Mon, 9 Jun 2008, Junio C Hamano wrote:

> Miklos Vajna <vmiklos@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> 
> > +struct commit_list *get_octopus_merge_bases(struct commit_list *in, int cleanup)
> > +{
> > +	struct commit_list *ret, *i;
> > +
> > +	ret = merge_bases_many(in->item, in->next);
> > +	if (cleanup)
> > +		for(i = in; i; i = i->next)
> > +			clear_commit_marks(i->item, all_flags);
> > +	return ret;
> > +}
> 
> I suspect either me or you are confused, but how is this exactly used?
> 
> The code for merge_bases_many(), at least the one I showed you a few days
> ago, is not a replacement for "show-branch --merge-base", and I do not
> think you would want to use it as such in the rewrite of git-merge, if you
> are trying to replace this part of git-merge.sh:
> 
>         case "$#" in
>         1)
>                 common=$(git merge-base --all $head "$@")
>                 ;;
>         *)
>                 common=$(git show-branch --merge-base $head "$@")
>                 ;;
>         esac
> 
> The purpose of merge-base-many code was to improve this line in the
> git-merge-octopus.sh:
> 
> 	common=$(git merge-base --all $MRC $SHA1) ||
> 		die "Unable to find common commit with $SHA1"
> 
> Instead of keeping a single MRC, we can compute the merge-base-many
> between the SHA1 (i.e. the one we are looking at right now -- it is fed as
> "one") and all the previous SHA1's we have already looked at (they become
> "two's"), like this:
> 
> 	common($git merge-base-many $SHA1 $SHA1_SO_FAR)
> 
> and you would have at the end of the loop:
> 
> 	SHA1_SO_FAR="$SHA1_SO_FAR$SHA1 "
> 
> or something.

Ah!  Even I thought that merge_bases_many() was meant for the show-branch 
--merge-base case.

However, your remark about optimizing for the two-head case got me 
thinking: should we not rather use the simple algorithm Miklos proposed 
for octopus_merge_bases(), even if it is suboptimal?

Octopus is such a rare case that it is more important to have a robust, 
working code, than a fast one, right?  Especially since Octopus will be 
exercized much less often, and therefore has a higher chance of hiding a 
bug.

Ciao,
Dscho

--
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

[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