On 2008.07.25 07:54:49 -0400, Nicolas Pitre wrote: > On Fri, 25 Jul 2008, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > On Thu, 24 Jul 2008, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > > > > The function does not seem to use type (which the patch is also setting) > > > nor real_type (which the patch does not set). > > > > > > However, the code checks objects[nth].real_type all over the place in > > > the code. Doesn't the lack of real_type assignment in > > > append_obj_to_pack() affect them in any way? > > > > >From staring at the code, I thought that real_type was set in > > resolve_delta(), but I may be wrong. > > > > The safer thing would be to set it, but I am not quite sure if we can use > > "type" directly, or if type can be "delta" for an object that is used to > > complete the pack, and therefore stored as a non-delta. > > Objects to complete the pack are always non delta, so the type and > real_type should be the same. However that shouldn't matter since at > that point the object array is not walked anymore, at least not for > appended objects, and therefore initializing the type at that point is > redundant. Is that still true when the object has been pruned due to memory constraints set by deltaBaseCacheLimit? AFAICT when reloading the data for the object, we end up in get_base_data, which at least checks obj->type. Björn -- 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
