From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
To: "Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy" <pclouds@gmail.com>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Ramsay Jones <ramsay@ramsay1.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] index-pack: support multithreaded delta resolving
Date: Thu, 03 May 2012 15:10:22 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <7v62ccex0x.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1334123388-6083-4-git-send-email-pclouds@gmail.com> (=?utf-8?B?Ik5ndXnhu4VuCVRow6FpIE5n4buNYw==?= Duy"'s message of "Wed, 11 Apr 2012 12:49:48 +0700")
Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy <pclouds@gmail.com> writes:
> @@ -696,7 +796,31 @@ static void second_pass(struct object_entry *obj)
> base_obj->obj = obj;
> base_obj->data = NULL;
> find_unresolved_deltas(base_obj);
> - display_progress(progress, nr_resolved_deltas);
> +}
> +
> +static void *threaded_second_pass(void *arg)
> +{
> +#ifndef NO_PTHREADS
> + if (threads_active)
> + pthread_setspecific(key, arg);
> +#endif
> + for (;;) {
> + int i;
> + work_lock();
> + display_progress(progress, nr_resolved_deltas);
> + while (nr_processed < nr_objects &&
> + is_delta_type(objects[nr_processed].type))
> + nr_processed++;
> + if (nr_processed >= nr_objects) {
> + work_unlock();
> + break;
> + }
> + i = nr_processed++;
> + work_unlock();
> +
> + second_pass(&objects[i]);
> + }
> + return NULL;
> }
It may be just the matter of naming, but the above is taking the
abstraction backwards, I think. Shouldn't it be structured in such a way
that the caller may call second_pass() and its implementation may turn out
to be threaded (or not)?
The naming of "arg" made things worse. I wasted 5 minutes scratching my
head thinking "arg" was a single specific object that was to be given to
second_pass(), and wondered why it is made into thread-local data. Name
it "thread_data" or something.
And I think the root cause of this confusion is the way "second_pass" was
split out in the earlier patch. It is not the entire second-pass, but is
merely a single step of it (the whole "for (i = 0; i < nr_objects; i++)"
is the second-pass, in other words), and its implementation detail might
change to either thread (i.e. instead of a single line of control
iterating from 0 to nr_objects, each thread grab the next available task
and work on it until everything is exhausted) or not.
By the way, if one object is very heavy and takes a lot of time until
completion, could it be possible that objects[0] is still being processed
for its base data but objects[1] has already completed and an available
thread could work on objects[2]? How does it learn to process objects[2]
in such a case, or does it wait until the thread working on objects[0] is
done?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-05-03 22:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-04-11 5:49 [PATCH v3 0/3] Multithread index-pack Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy
2012-04-11 5:49 ` [PATCH v3 1/3] compat/win32/pthread.h: Add an pthread_key_delete() implementation Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy
2012-04-11 5:49 ` [PATCH v3 2/3] index-pack: split second pass obj handling into own function Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy
2012-04-11 5:49 ` [PATCH v3 3/3] index-pack: support multithreaded delta resolving Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy
2012-05-03 22:10 ` Junio C Hamano [this message]
2012-05-04 6:21 ` Junio C Hamano
2012-05-04 12:50 ` Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy
2012-05-04 15:23 ` Junio C Hamano
2012-05-06 12:31 ` [PATCH 1/4] compat/win32/pthread.h: Add an pthread_key_delete() implementation Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy
2012-05-06 12:31 ` [PATCH 2/4] index-pack: restructure pack processing into three main functions Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy
2012-05-08 0:19 ` Junio C Hamano
2012-05-06 12:31 ` [PATCH 3/4] index-pack: support multithreaded delta resolving Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy
2012-05-06 12:31 ` [PATCH 4/4] index-pack: disable threading if NO_PREAD is defined Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=7v62ccex0x.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org \
--to=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pclouds@gmail.com \
--cc=ramsay@ramsay1.demon.co.uk \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).