Web lists-archives.com

Re: [PATCH 0/4] a few mark_parents_uninteresting cleanups

On 5/11/2018 2:00 PM, Jeff King wrote:
This is a follow-up to the discussion from February:


There I theorized that some of these extra has_object_file() checks were
unnecessary. After poking around a bit, I've convinced myself that this
is the case, so here are some patches.

After Stolee's fix in ebbed3ba04 (revision.c: reduce object database
queries, 2018-02-24), I doubt this will provide any noticeable speedup.
IMHO the value is just in simplifying the logic.

The first two patches are the actual has_object_file simplifications.
The second two are an attempt to fix some head-scratching I had while
reading mark_parents_uninteresting(). I hope the result is easier to
follow, but I may have just shuffled one confusion for another. :)

   [1/4]: mark_tree_contents_uninteresting(): drop missing object check
   [2/4]: mark_parents_uninteresting(): drop missing object check
   [3/4]: mark_parents_uninteresting(): replace list with stack
   [4/4]: mark_parents_uninteresting(): avoid most allocation

  revision.c | 90 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++------------------------
  1 file changed, 50 insertions(+), 40 deletions(-)


This series looks good to me. I found Patch 3 hard to read in the diff, so I just looked at the final result and the new arrangement is very clear about how it should behave.

Reviewed-by: Derrick Stolee <dstolee@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>