On Sun, Feb 03, 2008 at 02:13:18AM -0500, Jeff King wrote:

quoted text
> Ah. I think what is happening is something like this:
> 
>   - when we add 'four' as uninteresting, we mark its parents as
>     uninteresting in handle_commit
>   - we don't recursively follow all of its parents because we haven't
>     parsed them yet
>   - when we get to limit_list, we call mark_parents_uninteresting again.
>     But we have already marked four^ as uninteresting, and therefore we
>     do not recurse in marking
>   - we add the parents to the list, but they are not interesting, and
>     therefore we quit

So the "fix" I posted before was to stop bailing on
everybody_uninteresting; clearly it is possible that although those
commits are uninteresting, we still have work to do on their ancestors.
There is probably a performance impact since we will end up traversing
the whole commit chain just to mark them all uninteresting.

We could also always recurse in make_parents_uninteresting; I think this
has the same performance problem, since we have to parse the parents for
each commit.

We could topologically order the commits going into limit_list (it just
works most of the time because the date ordering is _mostly_ right).
This guarantees that we deal with 'four' before 'one'. But topo sorting
is expensive.

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