I haven't studied and thought about the motivation behind these two
patches, but one thing I noticed...

Ben Peart <ben.pe...@microsoft.com> writes:

> diff --git a/dir.c b/dir.c
> index 63a917be45..1aa639b9f4 100644
> --- a/dir.c
> +++ b/dir.c
> @@ -1102,6 +1103,12 @@ int is_excluded_from_list(const char *pathname,
>                         struct exclude_list *el, struct index_state *istate)
>  {
>       struct exclude *exclude;
> +
> +     if (*dtype == DT_UNKNOWN)
> +             *dtype = get_dtype(NULL, istate, pathname, pathlen);
> +     if (fsexcludes_is_excluded_from(istate, pathname, pathlen, *dtype) > 0)
> +             return 1;
> +
>       exclude = last_exclude_matching_from_list(pathname, pathlen, basename,
>                                                 dtype, el, istate);
>       if (exclude)
> @@ -1317,8 +1324,15 @@ struct exclude *last_exclude_matching(struct 
> dir_struct *dir,
>  int is_excluded(struct dir_struct *dir, struct index_state *istate,
>               const char *pathname, int *dtype_p)
>  {
> -     struct exclude *exclude =
> -             last_exclude_matching(dir, istate, pathname, dtype_p);
> +     struct exclude *exclude;
> +     int pathlen = strlen(pathname);
> +
> +     if (*dtype_p == DT_UNKNOWN)
> +             *dtype_p = get_dtype(NULL, istate, pathname, pathlen);
> +     if (fsexcludes_is_excluded_from(istate, pathname, pathlen, *dtype_p) > 
> 0)
> +             return 1;
> +
> +     exclude = last_exclude_matching(dir, istate, pathname, dtype_p);
>       if (exclude)
>               return exclude->flags & EXC_FLAG_NEGATIVE ? 0 : 1;
>       return 0;

A piece of impression I am getting from the above two hunks is that
the fsexcludes_is_excluded_from() function requires a real dtype in
its last parameter (i.e. DT_UNKNOWN is not acceptable).

> @@ -1671,6 +1685,9 @@ static enum path_treatment treat_one_path(struct 
> dir_struct *dir,
>       if (dtype != DT_DIR && has_path_in_index)
>               return path_none;
>  
> +     if (fsexcludes_is_excluded_from(istate, path->buf, path->len, dtype) > 
> 0)
> +             return path_excluded;
> +

And this hunk reinforces that impression (we are comparing dtype
with DT_DIR, so we know we cannot be passing DT_UNKNOWN to it).

> @@ -2011,6 +2028,8 @@ static enum path_treatment 
> read_directory_recursive(struct dir_struct *dir,
>               /* add the path to the appropriate result list */
>               switch (state) {
>               case path_excluded:
> +                     if (fsexcludes_is_excluded_from(istate, path.buf, 
> path.len, DTYPE(cdir.de)) > 0)
> +                             break;

Then the use of DTYPE() looks a bit odd here.  On
NO_D_TYPE_IN_DIRENT platforms, we would get DT_UNKNOWN out of it and
then end up passing DT_UNKNOWN to the function.

Reply via email to