On Fri, 20 Oct 2017, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
> From the diff, it is not immediately clear that fsmonitor_dirty is not
> leaked in any code path.
>
> Could you clarify this in the commit message, please?
Will do!
> > @@ -238,6 +225,29 @@ void remove_fsmonitor(struct index_state *istate)
> >
On 10/23/2017 5:57 AM, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
Hi Peff,
On Fri, 20 Oct 2017, Jeff King wrote:
On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 03:16:20PM +0200, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
void tweak_fsmonitor(struct index_state *istate)
{
+ int i;
+
+ if (istate->fsmonitor_dirty) {
+
Hi Peff,
On Fri, 20 Oct 2017, Jeff King wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 03:16:20PM +0200, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
>
> > > void tweak_fsmonitor(struct index_state *istate)
> > > {
> > > + int i;
> > > +
> > > + if (istate->fsmonitor_dirty) {
> > > + /* Mark all entries valid */
> >
On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 03:16:20PM +0200, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
> > void tweak_fsmonitor(struct index_state *istate)
> > {
> > + int i;
> > +
> > + if (istate->fsmonitor_dirty) {
> > + /* Mark all entries valid */
> > + trace_printf_key(&trace_fsmonitor, "fsmonitor i
Ben Peart writes:
>>> + } else {
>>> + trace_printf_key(&trace_fsmonitor, "fsmonitor not enabled");
>>> + }
>>> +
>
> I'd remove the trace statement above as it isn't always
> accurate. fsmonitor could be enabled but just hasn't written/read the
> extension yet.
I agree; when it is
On 10/20/2017 9:16 AM, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
Hi Alex,
On Thu, 19 Oct 2017, Alex Vandiver wrote:
extern struct index_state the_index;
diff --git a/fsmonitor.c b/fsmonitor.c
index 7c1540c05..4c2668f57 100644
--- a/fsmonitor.c
+++ b/fsmonitor.c
@@ -49,20 +49,7 @@ int read_fsmonitor_exten
Hi Alex,
On Thu, 19 Oct 2017, Alex Vandiver wrote:
> extern struct index_state the_index;
> diff --git a/fsmonitor.c b/fsmonitor.c
> index 7c1540c05..4c2668f57 100644
> --- a/fsmonitor.c
> +++ b/fsmonitor.c
> @@ -49,20 +49,7 @@ int read_fsmonitor_extension(struct index_state *istate,
> const vo
If the fsmonitor extension is used in conjunction with the split index
extension, the set of entries in the index when it is first loaded is
only a subset of the real index. This leads to only the non-"base"
index being marked as CE_FSMONITOR_VALID.
Delay the expansion of the ewah bitmap until af
8 matches
Mail list logo