On 11/29/08, Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy <pclouds@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 11/29/08, Daniel Barkalow <barkalow@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > If there's any need for this to be distinguished from "assume unchanged", > > I think it should be used with, not instead of, the CE_VALID bit; and it > > could probably use some bit in the stat info section, since we don't need > > stat info if we know by assumption that the entry is valid. > > > Interesting. I'll think more about this. > As I said, CE_VALID implies all files are present. I could make CE_NO_CHECKOUT to be used with CE_VALID, but I would need to check all CE_VALID code path to make sure the behaviour remains if CE_NO_CHECKOUT is absent. It's just more intrusive. I have nothing against storing CE_NO_CHECKOUT in stat info except that it seems inappropriate/hidden place to do. ce_flags is more obvious choice. I haven't looked closely to stat info code in read-cache.c though. -- Duy -- 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
