On 29.03.13 22:20, Junio C Hamano wrote:
[snip]
> The last two points can become a separate "preparation" step.  The
> result would be easier to read.
> 
> Your updated adjust_shared_perm() does not begin with:
> 
>       if (!shared_repository)
>               return 0;
> 
> as the original, but it always first calls to get_st_mode_bits()
> which makes a call to lstat(2).
> 
> That smells like a huge regression for !shared_repository case,
> unless you have updated the existing callers of adjust_shared_perm()
> not to call it when !shared_repository.
> 
Thanks for carefull review:
The achieved effect of the code is the same,
but the developer is to blame.

I send a new patch of 2/2 in a minute, splitted into 2 commits.

Highlights of part 2:
a) move "if (!shared_repository)" to the right place
b) Simplify calc_shared_perm() even more: Remove the variable "int shared"
c) Remove calc_shared_perm_dir(), the functionality is baked into
   adjust_shared_perm()

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to