Re: [PATCH 9/9] am: make a direct call to merge_recursive

Johannes Schindelin writes: > On Wed, 29 Jun 2016, Junio C Hamano wrote: > >> Johannes Schindelin writes: >> >> > From: Junio C Hamano >> >> Did I write this thing? > > Yes, you did. It was

Re: [PATCH 9/9] am: make a direct call to merge_recursive

Hi Junio, On Wed, 29 Jun 2016, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Johannes Schindelin writes: > > > - cp.git_cmd = 1; > > + init_merge_options(); > > + > > + o.branch1 = "HEAD"; > > + his_tree_name = xstrfmt("%.*s", linelen(state->msg), state->msg); > > + o.branch2 =

Re: [PATCH 9/9] am: make a direct call to merge_recursive

Hi Junio, On Wed, 29 Jun 2016, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Johannes Schindelin writes: > > > From: Junio C Hamano > > Did I write this thing? Yes, you did. It was db05d6194d3f9ea9e64163944961d5f6e85302be as part of pu@{2016-06-15}. > Having two

Re: [PATCH 9/9] am: make a direct call to merge_recursive

Johannes Schindelin writes: > - cp.git_cmd = 1; > + init_merge_options(); > + > + o.branch1 = "HEAD"; > + his_tree_name = xstrfmt("%.*s", linelen(state->msg), state->msg); > + o.branch2 = his_tree_name; > > - argv_array_pushf(_array,

Re: [PATCH 9/9] am: make a direct call to merge_recursive

Johannes Schindelin writes: > From: Junio C Hamano Did I write this thing? Having two sets of numbers that illustrated that this is not really a useful optimization in the bigger picture looks vaguely familiar (e.g. $gmane/279417), but the

[PATCH 9/9] am: make a direct call to merge_recursive

From: Junio C Hamano Instead of spawning merge-recursive via run_command() in run_fallback_merge_recursive(), make a direct call to the internal merge_recursive_generic(). Here is a quick benchmark result, applying a patch for b4391657 (merge: drop 'git merge HEAD ' syntax,