summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/list-objects.c
AgeCommit message (Collapse)AuthorFilesLines
2009-04-18Merge branch 'lt/pack-object-memuse'Libravatar Junio C Hamano1-16/+17
* lt/pack-object-memuse: show_object(): push path_name() call further down process_{tree,blob}: show objects without buffering Conflicts: builtin-pack-objects.c builtin-rev-list.c list-objects.c list-objects.h upload-pack.c
2009-04-12show_object(): push path_name() call further downLibravatar Linus Torvalds1-5/+5
In particular, pushing the "path_name()" call _into_ the show() function would seem to allow - more clarity into who "owns" the name (ie now when we free the name in the show_object callback, it's because we generated it ourselves by calling path_name()) - not calling path_name() at all, either because we don't care about the name in the first place, or because we are actually happy walking the linked list of "struct name_path *" and the last component. Now, I didn't do that latter optimization, because it would require some more coding, but especially looking at "builtin-pack-objects.c", we really don't even want the whole pathname, we really would be better off with the list of path components. Why? We use that name for two things: - add_preferred_base_object(), which actually _wants_ to traverse the path, and now does it by looking for '/' characters! - for 'name_hash()', which only cares about the last 16 characters of a name, so again, generating the full name seems to be just unnecessary work. Anyway, so I didn't look any closer at those things, but it did convince me that the "show_object()" calling convention was crazy, and we're actually better off doing _less_ in list-objects.c, and giving people access to the internal data structures so that they can decide whether they want to generate a path-name or not. This patch does that, and then for people who did use the name (even if they might do something more clever in the future), it just does the straightforward "name = path_name(path, component); .. free(name);" thing. Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2009-04-12process_{tree,blob}: show objects without bufferingLibravatar Linus Torvalds1-17/+18
Here's a less trivial thing, and slightly more dubious one. I was looking at that "struct object_array objects", and wondering why we do that. I have honestly totally forgotten. Why not just call the "show()" function as we encounter the objects? Rather than add the objects to the object_array, and then at the very end going through the array and doing a 'show' on all, just do things more incrementally. Now, there are possible downsides to this: - the "buffer using object_array" _can_ in theory result in at least better I-cache usage (two tight loops rather than one more spread out one). I don't think this is a real issue, but in theory.. - this _does_ change the order of the objects printed. Instead of doing a "process_tree(revs, commit->tree, &objects, NULL, "");" in the loop over the commits (which puts all the root trees _first_ in the object list, this patch just adds them to the list of pending objects, and then we'll traverse them in that order (and thus show each root tree object together with the objects we discover under it) I _think_ the new ordering actually makes more sense, but the object ordering is actually a subtle thing when it comes to packing efficiency, so any change in order is going to have implications for packing. Good or bad, I dunno. - There may be some reason why we did it that odd way with the object array, that I have simply forgotten. Anyway, now that we don't buffer up the objects before showing them that may actually result in lower memory usage during that whole traverse_commit_list() phase. This is seriously not very deeply tested. It makes sense to me, it seems to pass all the tests, it looks ok, but... Does anybody remember why we did that "object_array" thing? It used to be an "object_list" a long long time ago, but got changed into the array due to better memory usage patterns (those linked lists of obejcts are horrible from a memory allocation standpoint). But I wonder why we didn't do this back then. Maybe there's a reason for it. Or maybe there _used_ to be a reason, and no longer is. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2009-04-12Merge branch 'cc/bisect-filter'Libravatar Junio C Hamano1-4/+5
* cc/bisect-filter: (21 commits) rev-list: add "int bisect_show_flags" in "struct rev_list_info" rev-list: remove last static vars used in "show_commit" list-objects: add "void *data" parameter to show functions bisect--helper: string output variables together with "&&" rev-list: pass "int flags" as last argument of "show_bisect_vars" t6030: test bisecting with paths bisect: use "bisect--helper" and remove "filter_skipped" function bisect: implement "read_bisect_paths" to read paths in "$GIT_DIR/BISECT_NAMES" bisect--helper: implement "git bisect--helper" bisect: use the new generic "sha1_pos" function to lookup sha1 rev-list: call new "filter_skip" function patch-ids: use the new generic "sha1_pos" function to lookup sha1 sha1-lookup: add new "sha1_pos" function to efficiently lookup sha1 rev-list: pass "revs" to "show_bisect_vars" rev-list: make "show_bisect_vars" non static rev-list: move code to show bisect vars into its own function rev-list: move bisect related code into its own file rev-list: make "bisect_list" variable local to "cmd_rev_list" refs: add "for_each_ref_in" function to refactor "for_each_*_ref" functions quote: add "sq_dequote_to_argv" to put unwrapped args in an argv array ...
2009-04-08process_{tree,blob}: Remove useless xstrdup callsLibravatar Björn Steinbrink1-2/+0
The name of the processed object was duplicated for passing it to add_object(), but that already calls path_name, which allocates a new string anyway. So the memory allocated by the xstrdup calls just went nowhere, leaking memory. This reduces the RSS usage for a "rev-list --all --objects" by about 10% on the gentoo repo (fully packed) as well as linux-2.6.git: gentoo: | old | new ----------------|------------------------------- RSS | 1537284 | 1388408 VSZ | 1816852 | 1667952 time elapsed | 1:49.62 | 1:48.99 min. page faults| 417178 | 379919 linux-2.6.git: | old | new ----------------|------------------------------- RSS | 324452 | 292996 VSZ | 491792 | 460376 time elapsed | 0:14.53 | 0:14.28 min. page faults| 89360 | 81613 Signed-off-by: Björn Steinbrink <B.Steinbrink@gmx.de> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2009-04-07list-objects: add "void *data" parameter to show functionsLibravatar Christian Couder1-4/+5
The goal of this patch is to get rid of the "static struct rev_info revs" static variable in "builtin-rev-list.c". To do that, we need to pass the revs to the "show_commit" function in "builtin-rev-list.c" and this in turn means that the "traverse_commit_list" function in "list-objects.c" must be passed functions pointers to functions with 2 parameters instead of one. So we have to change all the callers and all the functions passed to "traverse_commit_list". Anyway this makes the code more clean and more generic, so it should be a good thing in the long run. Signed-off-by: Christian Couder <chriscool@tuxfamily.org> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2008-02-18list-objects.c::process_tree/blob: check for NULLLibravatar Martin Koegler1-0/+4
As these functions are directly called with the result from lookup_tree/blob, they must handle NULL. Signed-off-by: Martin Koegler <mkoegler@auto.tuwien.ac.at> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2007-11-10Fix memory leak in traverse_commit_listLibravatar Shawn O. Pearce1-0/+7
If we were listing objects too then the objects were buffered in an array only reachable from a stack allocated structure. When this function returns that array would be leaked as nobody would have a reference to it anymore. Historically this hasn't been a problem as the primary user of traverse_commit_list() (the noble git-rev-list) would terminate as soon as the function was finished, thus allowing the operating system to cleanup memory. However we have been leaking this data in git-pack-objects ever since that program learned how to run the revision listing internally, rather than relying on reading object names from git-rev-list. To better facilitate reuse of traverse_commit_list during other builtin tools (such as git-fetch) we shouldn't leak temporary memory like this and instead we need to clean up properly after ourselves. Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2007-05-21rename dirlink to gitlink.Libravatar Martin Waitz1-1/+1
Unify naming of plumbing dirlink/gitlink concept: git ls-files -z '*.[ch]' | xargs -0 perl -pi -e 's/dirlink/gitlink/g;' -e 's/DIRLNK/GITLINK/g;' Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
2007-04-14Teach git list-objects logic to not follow gitlinksLibravatar Linus Torvalds1-0/+34
This allows us to pack superprojects and thus clone them (but not yet check them out on the receiving side.. That's the next patch) Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
2007-03-21Initialize tree descriptors with a helper function rather than by hand.Libravatar Linus Torvalds1-2/+1
This removes slightly more lines than it adds, but the real reason for doing this is that future optimizations will require more setup of the tree descriptor, and so we want to do it in one place. Also renamed the "desc.buf" field to "desc.buffer" just to trigger compiler errors for old-style manual initializations, making sure I didn't miss anything. Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
2006-09-07pack-objects: further work on internal rev-list logic.Libravatar Junio C Hamano1-0/+33
This teaches the internal rev-list logic to understand options that are needed for pack handling: --all, --unpacked, and --thin. It also moves two functions from builtin-rev-list to list-objects so that the two programs can share more code. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
2006-09-07Separate object listing routines out of rev-listLibravatar Junio C Hamano1-0/+107
Create a separate file, list-objects.c, and move object listing routines from rev-list to it. The next round will use it in pack-objects directly. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>