[PATCH 4/6] builtin/submodule--helper: store update_clone information in a struct
The information that is printed for update_submodules in
'submodule--helper update-clone' and consumed by 'git submodule update'
is stored as a string per submodule. This made sense at the time of
48308681b07 (git submodule update: have a dedicated helper for cloning,
2016-02-29), but as we want to migrate the rest of the submodule update
into C, we're better off having access to the raw information in a helper
struct.
Signed-off-by: Stefan Beller
---
builtin/submodule--helper.c | 37 +++--
1 file changed, 27 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
diff --git a/builtin/submodule--helper.c b/builtin/submodule--helper.c
index 96929ba1096..fb54936efc7 100644
--- a/builtin/submodule--helper.c
+++ b/builtin/submodule--helper.c
@@ -1444,6 +1444,12 @@ static int module_clone(int argc, const char **argv,
const char *prefix)
return 0;
}
+struct update_clone_data {
+ const struct submodule *sub;
+ struct object_id oid;
+ unsigned just_cloned;
+};
+
struct submodule_update_clone {
/* index into 'list', the list of submodules to look into for cloning */
int current;
@@ -1463,8 +1469,9 @@ struct submodule_update_clone {
const char *recursive_prefix;
const char *prefix;
- /* Machine-readable status lines to be consumed by git-submodule.sh */
- struct string_list projectlines;
+ /* to be consumed by git-submodule.sh */
+ struct update_clone_data *update_clone;
+ int update_clone_nr; int update_clone_alloc;
/* If we want to stop as fast as possible and return an error */
unsigned quickstop : 1;
@@ -1478,7 +1485,7 @@ struct submodule_update_clone {
#define SUBMODULE_UPDATE_CLONE_INIT {0, MODULE_LIST_INIT, 0, \
SUBMODULE_UPDATE_STRATEGY_INIT, 0, 0, -1, STRING_LIST_INIT_DUP, 0, \
NULL, NULL, NULL, \
- STRING_LIST_INIT_DUP, 0, NULL, 0, 0}
+ NULL, 0, 0, 0, NULL, 0, 0, 0}
static void next_submodule_warn_missing(struct submodule_update_clone *suc,
@@ -1572,10 +1579,12 @@ static int prepare_to_clone_next_submodule(const struct
cache_entry *ce,
strbuf_addf(, "%s/.git", ce->name);
needs_cloning = !file_exists(sb.buf);
- strbuf_reset();
- strbuf_addf(, "dummy %s %d\t%s\n",
- oid_to_hex(>oid), needs_cloning, ce->name);
- string_list_append(>projectlines, sb.buf);
+ ALLOC_GROW(suc->update_clone, suc->update_clone_nr + 1,
+ suc->update_clone_alloc);
+ oidcpy(>update_clone[suc->update_clone_nr].oid, >oid);
+ suc->update_clone[suc->update_clone_nr].just_cloned = needs_cloning;
+ suc->update_clone[suc->update_clone_nr].sub = sub;
+ suc->update_clone_nr++;
if (!needs_cloning)
goto cleanup;
@@ -1718,7 +1727,8 @@ static int gitmodules_update_clone_config(const char
*var, const char *value,
static int update_submodules(struct submodule_update_clone *suc)
{
- struct string_list_item *item;
+ int i;
+ struct strbuf sb = STRBUF_INIT;
run_processes_parallel(suc->max_jobs,
update_clone_get_next_task,
@@ -1737,9 +1747,16 @@ static int update_submodules(struct
submodule_update_clone *suc)
if (suc->quickstop)
return 1;
- for_each_string_list_item(item, >projectlines)
- fprintf(stdout, "%s", item->string);
+ for (i = 0; i < suc->update_clone_nr; i++) {
+ strbuf_addf(, "dummy %s %d\t%s\n",
+ oid_to_hex(>update_clone[i].oid),
+ suc->update_clone[i].just_cloned,
+ suc->update_clone[i].sub->path);
+ fprintf(stdout, "%s", sb.buf);
+ strbuf_reset();
+ }
+ strbuf_release();
return 0;
}
--
2.18.0.233.g985f88cf7e-goog
Re: [PATCH 4/6] builtin/submodule--helper: store update_clone information in a struct
On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 12:37 PM Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
> Stefan Beller writes:
>
> > The information that is printed for update_submodules in
> > 'submodule--helper update-clone' and consumed by 'git submodule update'
> > is stored as a string per submodule. This made sense at the time of
> > 48308681b07 (git submodule update: have a dedicated helper for cloning,
> > 2016-02-29), but as we want to migrate the rest of the submodule update
> > into C, we're better off having access to the raw information in a helper
> > struct.
>
> The reasoning above makes sense, but I have a few niggles on the
> naming.
>
> * Anything you'd place to keep track of the state is "information",
>so a whole "_information" suffix to the structure name does not
>add much value. We've seen our fair share of (meaningless)
>"_data" suffix used in many places but I think the overly long
>"_information" that is equally meaningless trumps them. I think
>we also have "_info", but if we are not going to have a beter
>name, let's not be original and stick to "_data" like other
>existing codepath. An alternative with more meaningful name is
>of course better, though, but it is not all that much worth to
>spend too many braincycles on it.
agreed.
> * Is the fact that these parameters necessary to help populating
>the submodule repository are sent on a line to external process
>the most important aspect of the submodule_lines[] array? As
In terms of what the submodule--helper does, it is.
It is not the most important aspect in the big picture, or once
we finish the migration to not have shell interpret its output.
>this step is a preparation to migrate out of that line/text
>oriented IPC, I think line-ness is the least important and
>interesting thing to name the variable with.
ok.
> If I were writing this patch, perhaps I'd do
>
> struct update_clone_data *update_clone;
> int update_clone_nr, update_clone_alloc;
>
> following my gut, but since you've been thinking about submodule
> longer than I have, perhaps you can come up with a better name.
That makes sense. We do not need to mention 'submodule' as that
ought to be obvious from the file name already and 'update_clone'
is just enough to describe what we are doing.
Although there is already struct submodule_update_clone, which
would be the better candidate for 'update_clone' and this new
struct would be used as a helper in that struct, so update_clone_data
I'll think of adding a patch to rename that already existing struct
(submodule_update_clone -> update_clone) and renaming
this to update_clone_data.
>
> > @@ -1463,8 +1469,9 @@ struct submodule_update_clone {
> > const char *recursive_prefix;
> > const char *prefix;
> >
> > - /* Machine-readable status lines to be consumed by git-submodule.sh */
> > - struct string_list projectlines;
> > + /* to be consumed by git-submodule.sh */
> > + struct submodule_update_clone_information *submodule_lines;
> > + int submodule_lines_nr; int submodule_lines_alloc;
> >
> > /* If we want to stop as fast as possible and return an error */
> > unsigned quickstop : 1;
> > @@ -1478,7 +1485,7 @@ struct submodule_update_clone {
> > #define SUBMODULE_UPDATE_CLONE_INIT {0, MODULE_LIST_INIT, 0, \
> > SUBMODULE_UPDATE_STRATEGY_INIT, 0, 0, -1, STRING_LIST_INIT_DUP, 0, \
> > NULL, NULL, NULL, \
> > - STRING_LIST_INIT_DUP, 0, NULL, 0, 0}
> > + NULL, 0, 0, 0, NULL, 0, 0, 0}
>
> The structure definition and this macro definition are nearby, so it
> is not crucial, but its probably not a bad idea to switch to C99
> initializers for a thing like this to make it more readable, once
> the code around this area stabilizes back again sufficiently (IOW,
> let's not distract ourselves in the middle of adding a new feature
> like this one).
Are we still in the phase of "test balloon" or do we now accept
C99 initializers all over the code base?
But I agree to defer the conversion for now.
Thanks,
Stefan
Re: [PATCH 4/6] builtin/submodule--helper: store update_clone information in a struct
Stefan Beller writes:
> The information that is printed for update_submodules in
> 'submodule--helper update-clone' and consumed by 'git submodule update'
> is stored as a string per submodule. This made sense at the time of
> 48308681b07 (git submodule update: have a dedicated helper for cloning,
> 2016-02-29), but as we want to migrate the rest of the submodule update
> into C, we're better off having access to the raw information in a helper
> struct.
The reasoning above makes sense, but I have a few niggles on the
naming.
* Anything you'd place to keep track of the state is "information",
so a whole "_information" suffix to the structure name does not
add much value. We've seen our fair share of (meaningless)
"_data" suffix used in many places but I think the overly long
"_information" that is equally meaningless trumps them. I think
we also have "_info", but if we are not going to have a beter
name, let's not be original and stick to "_data" like other
existing codepath. An alternative with more meaningful name is
of course better, though, but it is not all that much worth to
spend too many braincycles on it.
* Is the fact that these parameters necessary to help populating
the submodule repository are sent on a line to external process
the most important aspect of the submodule_lines[] array? As
this step is a preparation to migrate out of that line/text
oriented IPC, I think line-ness is the least important and
interesting thing to name the variable with.
If I were writing this patch, perhaps I'd do
struct update_clone_data *update_clone;
int update_clone_nr, update_clone_alloc;
following my gut, but since you've been thinking about submodule
longer than I have, perhaps you can come up with a better name.
> @@ -1463,8 +1469,9 @@ struct submodule_update_clone {
> const char *recursive_prefix;
> const char *prefix;
>
> - /* Machine-readable status lines to be consumed by git-submodule.sh */
> - struct string_list projectlines;
> + /* to be consumed by git-submodule.sh */
> + struct submodule_update_clone_information *submodule_lines;
> + int submodule_lines_nr; int submodule_lines_alloc;
>
> /* If we want to stop as fast as possible and return an error */
> unsigned quickstop : 1;
> @@ -1478,7 +1485,7 @@ struct submodule_update_clone {
> #define SUBMODULE_UPDATE_CLONE_INIT {0, MODULE_LIST_INIT, 0, \
> SUBMODULE_UPDATE_STRATEGY_INIT, 0, 0, -1, STRING_LIST_INIT_DUP, 0, \
> NULL, NULL, NULL, \
> - STRING_LIST_INIT_DUP, 0, NULL, 0, 0}
> + NULL, 0, 0, 0, NULL, 0, 0, 0}
The structure definition and this macro definition are nearby, so it
is not crucial, but its probably not a bad idea to switch to C99
initializers for a thing like this to make it more readable, once
the code around this area stabilizes back again sufficiently (IOW,
let's not distract ourselves in the middle of adding a new feature
like this one).
[PATCH 4/6] builtin/submodule--helper: store update_clone information in a struct
The information that is printed for update_submodules in
'submodule--helper update-clone' and consumed by 'git submodule update'
is stored as a string per submodule. This made sense at the time of
48308681b07 (git submodule update: have a dedicated helper for cloning,
2016-02-29), but as we want to migrate the rest of the submodule update
into C, we're better off having access to the raw information in a helper
struct.
Signed-off-by: Stefan Beller
---
builtin/submodule--helper.c | 37 +++--
1 file changed, 27 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
diff --git a/builtin/submodule--helper.c b/builtin/submodule--helper.c
index 96929ba1096..c9c3fe2bf28 100644
--- a/builtin/submodule--helper.c
+++ b/builtin/submodule--helper.c
@@ -1444,6 +1444,12 @@ static int module_clone(int argc, const char **argv,
const char *prefix)
return 0;
}
+struct submodule_update_clone_information {
+ const struct submodule *sub;
+ struct object_id oid;
+ unsigned just_cloned;
+};
+
struct submodule_update_clone {
/* index into 'list', the list of submodules to look into for cloning */
int current;
@@ -1463,8 +1469,9 @@ struct submodule_update_clone {
const char *recursive_prefix;
const char *prefix;
- /* Machine-readable status lines to be consumed by git-submodule.sh */
- struct string_list projectlines;
+ /* to be consumed by git-submodule.sh */
+ struct submodule_update_clone_information *submodule_lines;
+ int submodule_lines_nr; int submodule_lines_alloc;
/* If we want to stop as fast as possible and return an error */
unsigned quickstop : 1;
@@ -1478,7 +1485,7 @@ struct submodule_update_clone {
#define SUBMODULE_UPDATE_CLONE_INIT {0, MODULE_LIST_INIT, 0, \
SUBMODULE_UPDATE_STRATEGY_INIT, 0, 0, -1, STRING_LIST_INIT_DUP, 0, \
NULL, NULL, NULL, \
- STRING_LIST_INIT_DUP, 0, NULL, 0, 0}
+ NULL, 0, 0, 0, NULL, 0, 0, 0}
static void next_submodule_warn_missing(struct submodule_update_clone *suc,
@@ -1572,10 +1579,12 @@ static int prepare_to_clone_next_submodule(const struct
cache_entry *ce,
strbuf_addf(, "%s/.git", ce->name);
needs_cloning = !file_exists(sb.buf);
- strbuf_reset();
- strbuf_addf(, "dummy %s %d\t%s\n",
- oid_to_hex(>oid), needs_cloning, ce->name);
- string_list_append(>projectlines, sb.buf);
+ ALLOC_GROW(suc->submodule_lines, suc->submodule_lines_nr + 1,
+suc->submodule_lines_alloc);
+ oidcpy(>submodule_lines[suc->submodule_lines_nr].oid, >oid);
+ suc->submodule_lines[suc->submodule_lines_nr].just_cloned =
needs_cloning;
+ suc->submodule_lines[suc->submodule_lines_nr].sub = sub;
+ suc->submodule_lines_nr++;
if (!needs_cloning)
goto cleanup;
@@ -1718,7 +1727,8 @@ static int gitmodules_update_clone_config(const char
*var, const char *value,
static int update_submodules(struct submodule_update_clone *suc)
{
- struct string_list_item *item;
+ int i;
+ struct strbuf sb = STRBUF_INIT;
run_processes_parallel(suc->max_jobs,
update_clone_get_next_task,
@@ -1737,9 +1747,16 @@ static int update_submodules(struct
submodule_update_clone *suc)
if (suc->quickstop)
return 1;
- for_each_string_list_item(item, >projectlines)
- fprintf(stdout, "%s", item->string);
+ for (i = 0; i < suc->submodule_lines_nr; i++) {
+ strbuf_addf(, "dummy %s %d\t%s\n",
+ oid_to_hex(>submodule_lines[i].oid),
+ suc->submodule_lines[i].just_cloned,
+ suc->submodule_lines[i].sub->path);
+ fprintf(stdout, "%s", sb.buf);
+ strbuf_reset();
+ }
+ strbuf_release();
return 0;
}
--
2.18.0.203.gfac676dfb9-goog
