git blame vs git log --follow performance

Hi. Is there something that can be done about improving git log --follow -- file performance to be nearly equivalent speed to git blame -- file ? The overall cpu time taken for these 2 commands that track individual file history can be quite different. git log --follow -- file and

Re: git blame vs git log --follow performance

On Mon, 2014-01-27 at 08:33 +0700, Duy Nguyen wrote: On Mon, Jan 27, 2014 at 4:10 AM, Joe Perches j...@perches.com wrote: For instance (using the Linus' linux kernel git): $ time git log --follow -- drivers/firmware/google/Kconfig /dev/null real0m42.329s user0m40.984s sys

Re: [PATCH] checkpatch: Add test for commit id formatting style in commit log

On Sun, 2014-08-10 at 23:08 +0200, Geert Uytterhoeven wrote: Hi Joe, Hi Geert. On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 12:00 AM, Joe Perches j...@perches.com wrote: Commit logs have various forms of commit id references. Try to standardize on a 12 character long lower case commit id along

Re: [PATCH] checkpatch: Add test for commit id formatting style in commit log

On Sun, 2014-08-10 at 14:35 -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: On Sun, 10 Aug 2014 14:28:01 -0700 Joe Perches j...@perches.com wrote: On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 12:00 AM, Joe Perches j...@perches.com wrote: Commit logs have various forms of commit id references. Try to standardize on a 12

project wide: git config entry for [diff] renames=true

On Thu, 2014-09-25 at 17:03 +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: In the future, please generate a git move diff, which makes it easier to review, and prove that nothing really changed. It also helps if the file is a bit different from what you diffed against, which in my case, was true. Maybe

Re: project wide: git config entry for [diff] renames=true

On Thu, 2014-09-25 at 14:00 -0400, Jeff King wrote: On Thu, Sep 25, 2014 at 08:48:31AM -0700, Joe Perches wrote: On Thu, 2014-09-25 at 17:03 +0200, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote: In the future, please generate a git move diff, which makes it easier to review, and prove that nothing really

Odd git am behavior rewriting subject, adding ASoC: prefix

neatening Use a more common logging style. o Convert DEBUG macros to pr_debug o Add pr_fmt o Remove embedded function names from pr_debug o Convert printks to pr_level o Coalesce formats and align arguments o Add missing terminating newlines Signed-off-by: Joe Perches j...@perches.com

Re: Odd git am behavior rewriting subject, adding ASoC: prefix

On Wed, 2014-11-05 at 22:12 +1300, Chris Packham wrote: On Wed, Nov 5, 2014 at 2:12 PM, Joe Perches j...@perches.com wrote: I have a patch file created by git format-patch. [] ASoC:? where does that come from? [] Looks like you have an apply-patch-msg hook installed. What does the output

Re: [PATCH 2/2] send-email: add series-cc-cmd option

On Tue, 2012-11-13 at 03:21 +0530, Ramkumar Ramachandra wrote: Felipe Contreras wrote: cc-cmd is only per-file, and many times receipients get lost without seing the full patch series. s/seing/seeing [...] Looks good otherwise. s/receipients/recipients/ too Practically this is ok

Re: [PATCH 2/2] send-email: add series-cc-cmd option

On Tue, 2012-11-13 at 00:03 +0100, Felipe Contreras wrote: On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 11:52 PM, Joe Perches j...@perches.com wrote: On Tue, 2012-11-13 at 03:21 +0530, Ramkumar Ramachandra wrote: Felipe Contreras wrote: cc-cmd is only per-file, and many times receipients get lost without

Re: [PATCH 2/2] send-email: add series-cc-cmd option

On Tue, 2012-11-13 at 00:37 +0100, Felipe Contreras wrote: On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 12:13 AM, Joe Perches j...@perches.com wrote: On Tue, 2012-11-13 at 00:03 +0100, Felipe Contreras wrote: [] For --to-cmd and --cc-cmd? So basically you check the dirname of the argument passed? yes

bug? git format-patch -M -D then git am fails

If a file is deleted with git rm and a patch is then generated with git format-patch -M - -- 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

bug? git format-patch -M -D then git am fails

(Sorry about the partial message. evolution and ctrl-enter sends, grumble...) If a file is deleted with git rm and a patch is then generated with git format-patch -M -D git am is unable to apply the resultant patch. Is this working as designed? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line

Re: bug? git format-patch -M -D then git am fails

On Tue, 2012-11-13 at 14:55 -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: Joe Perches j...@perches.com writes: (Sorry about the partial message. evolution and ctrl-enter sends, grumble...) If a file is deleted with git rm and a patch is then generated with git format-patch -M -D git am is unable

Re: [PATCH V3] git-send-email: Add auto-cc to all body signatures

On Wed, 2015-12-02 at 09:58 -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > "Trailers" are not limited to "*-by:" btw:  what are "Trailers" limited by? -- 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

[PATCH V3] git-send-email: Add auto-cc to all body signatures

quot;CC:" entries. Add command line option --suppress-cc=signatures to avoid adding these entries to the cc. Signed-off-by: Joe Perches perches.com> Acked-by: Jeff Kirsher intel.com> --- > It's been four years, but I recently ran into this. I mistakenly thought > that git would

Re: [PATCH V3] git-send-email: Add auto-cc to all body signatures

On Wed, 2015-12-02 at 09:58 -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Joe Perches <j...@perches.com> writes: > > > Many types of signatures are used by various projects. > > > > The most common type is formatted: > > "[some_signature_type]-by: First Last

Re: get_maintainer.pl and .mailmap entries with more than 2 addresses

On Wed, 2016-08-03 at 00:17 +0200, Florian Mickler wrote: > cc'd mche...@s-opensource.com  (Mauro, is your kernel.org address up?) > >  Am Tue, 02 Aug 2016 09:36:21 -0700 > schrieb Joe Perches <j...@perches.com>: > > > > > Hello Florian. > > There is

get_maintainer.pl and .mailmap entries with more than 2 addresses

Hello Florian. There is at least an oddity with get_maintainer handling of a .mailmap entry form. For instance: Mauro's .mailmap entry is: Mauro Carvalho Chehab

Re: [RFC for GIT] pull-request: add praise to people doing QA

On Thu, 2017-01-19 at 15:42 -0800, Jacob Keller wrote: > On Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 1:20 PM, Jeff King wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 09:43:45PM +0100, Wolfram Sang wrote: > > > > > > As to the implementation, I am wondering if we can make this somehow > > > > work well with the

Re: [PATCH V2] git-send-email: Add ability to cc: any "bylines" in the commit message

On Wed, 2016-08-31 at 12:34 -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Joe Perches <j...@perches.com> writes: > > Many commits have various forms of bylines similar to > A missing blank line (I can tweak while queuing). [] > > + next if $suppress

Re: git am and duplicate signatures

(adding lkml) On Tue, 2016-08-30 at 09:54 -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Joe Perches <j...@perches.com> writes: > > git-am -s will avoid duplicating the last signature > > in a patch. > > > > But given a developer creates a patch, send it around for > > a

Re: git am and duplicate signatures

On Tue, 2016-08-30 at 11:17 -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Joe Perches <j...@perches.com> writes: > > > > > On Tue, 2016-08-30 at 10:41 -0700, Joe Perches wrote: > > > > > > Maybe something like traces or chains. > > Or "taggers" or &quo

Re: [PATCH] git-send-email: Add ability to cc: any "trailers" from commit message

On Wed, 2016-08-31 at 10:54 -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Joe Perches <j...@perches.com> writes: > > > > > Many commits have various forms of trailers similar to > >  "Acked-by: Name " and "Reported-by: Name " > > > > Add t

[PATCH V2] git-send-email: Add ability to cc: any "bylines" in the commit message

Many commits have various forms of bylines similar to "Acked-by: Name " and "Reported-by: Name " Add the ability to cc: bylines (e.g. Acked-by:) when using git send-email. This can be suppressed with --suppress-cc=bylines. Signed-off-by: Joe Perches <j...@perches.

Re: [PATCH] git-send-email: Add ability to cc: any "trailers" from commit message

On Wed, 2016-08-31 at 10:54 -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Joe Perches <j...@perches.com> writes: > > > > Many commits have various forms of trailers similar to > >  "Acked-by: Name " and "Reported-by: Name " > > > > Add the ability

[PATCH] git-send-email: Add ability to cc: any "trailers" from commit message

Many commits have various forms of trailers similar to "Acked-by: Name " and "Reported-by: Name " Add the ability to cc these trailers when using git send-email. This can be suppressed with --suppress-cc=trailers. Signed-off-by: Joe Perches <j...@perches.com> -

Re: [Ksummit-discuss] checkkpatch (in)sanity ?

On Sun, 2016-08-28 at 11:59 +0200, Julia Lawall wrote: > On Sun, 28 Aug 2016, Alexey Dobriyan wrote: [] > > The problem is that c-h.pl generates noise in the commit history and > > makes git-blame less useful than it can be. > > Could it be that this is a problem with git blame, rather than with

Re: [Ksummit-discuss] checkkpatch (in)sanity ?

On Sun, 2016-08-28 at 23:24 +0200, Dennis Kaarsemaker wrote: > > There are some that want an ncurses only version of git blame > > that could use arrow-key style navigation for historical commit > > line-ranges. > > > > git gui blame kind of works, but it's not ncurses/text based. > > git-cola

Re: [PATCH] printk: Remove no longer used second struct cont

On Thu, 2016-12-15 at 18:10 -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Thu, Dec 15, 2016 at 5:57 PM, Joe Perches <j...@perches.com> wrote: > > > > > > In fact, I thought we already upped the check-patch limit to 100? > > > > Nope, CodingStyle neither. > >

Re: [PATCH] printk: Remove no longer used second struct cont

On Thu, 2016-12-15 at 21:00 -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Joe Perches <j...@perches.com> writes: > > > grep 2.5.4 was the last version that supported the -P option to > > grep through for multiple lines. > > Does anybody know why it was dropped? perl compatible re

Re: grep vs git grep performance?

On Thu, 2017-10-26 at 18:13 +0200, SZEDER Gábor wrote: > > Comparing a cache warm git grep vs command line grep > > shows significant differences in cpu & wall clock. > > > > Any ideas how to improve this? > > > > $ time git grep "\bseq_.*%p\W" | wc -l > > 112 > > > > real0m4.271s > >

Re: grep vs git grep performance?

On Thu, 2017-10-26 at 09:58 -0700, Stefan Beller wrote: > + Avar who knows a thing about pcre (I assume the regex compilation > has impact on grep speed) > > On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 8:02 AM, Joe Perches <j...@perches.com> wrote: > > Comparing a cache warm git grep vs com

grep vs git grep performance?

Comparing a cache warm git grep vs command line grep shows significant differences in cpu & wall clock. Any ideas how to improve this? $ time git grep "\bseq_.*%p\W" | wc -l 112 real0m4.271s user0m15.520s sys 0m0.395s $ time grep -r --include=*.[ch] "\bseq_.*%p\W" * | wc -l 112

Re: grep vs git grep performance?

On Thu, 2017-10-26 at 17:11 +0200, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote: > On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 5:02 PM, Joe Perches <j...@perches.com> wrote: > > Comparing a cache warm git grep vs command line grep > > shows significant differences in cpu & wall clock. > > > > Any i

Re: grep vs git grep performance?

On Thu, 2017-10-26 at 10:45 -0700, Stefan Beller wrote: > On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 10:41 AM, Joe Perches <j...@perches.com> wrote: > > On Thu, 2017-10-26 at 09:58 -0700, Stefan Beller wrote: > > > + Avar who knows a thing about pcre (I assume the regex compilation > &

Re: grep vs git grep performance?

On Sat, 2017-10-28 at 00:11 +0200, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote: > On Fri, Oct 27 2017, Joe Perches jotted: [] > > git grep performance has already been > > quite successfully improved. > > ...and I have WIP patches to use the PCRE engine for patterns without -P > which I

Re: git send-email and sending the cover-letter to all cc addresses found in a patch series

On Fri, 2018-03-23 at 08:38 +0100, Dominik Brodowski wrote: > On Thu, Mar 22, 2018 at 10:44:54AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 22, 2018 at 10:29 AM, Peter Zijlstra > > wrote: > > > > > > But why !? Either Cc me on more of the series such that the whole makes