From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 28C1CC433DB for ; Sat, 30 Jan 2021 09:07:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00A7764E27 for ; Sat, 30 Jan 2021 09:07:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229468AbhA3JHw (ORCPT ); Sat, 30 Jan 2021 04:07:52 -0500 Received: from cloud.peff.net ([104.130.231.41]:41420 "EHLO cloud.peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S233857AbhA3JHa (ORCPT ); Sat, 30 Jan 2021 04:07:30 -0500 Received: (qmail 16569 invoked by uid 109); 30 Jan 2021 08:39:24 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO peff.net) (10.0.1.2) by cloud.peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with ESMTP; Sat, 30 Jan 2021 08:39:24 +0000 Authentication-Results: cloud.peff.net; auth=none Received: (qmail 23241 invoked by uid 111); 30 Jan 2021 08:39:23 -0000 Received: from coredump.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.2) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with (TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Sat, 30 Jan 2021 03:39:23 -0500 Authentication-Results: peff.net; auth=none Date: Sat, 30 Jan 2021 03:39:22 -0500 From: Jeff King To: Taylor Blau Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, dstolee@microsoft.com, gitster@pobox.com, jrnieder@gmail.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 01/10] packfile: prepare for the existence of '*.rev' files Message-ID: References: <6f8b70ab276c0579c957c315743fdab63462a605.1611617820.git.me@ttaylorr.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 08:14:41PM -0500, Taylor Blau wrote: > > I dunno. Maybe I am being overly picky. The .idx code already does it > > like this, and I believe the index (as in .git/index) does, too. We have > > run into problems (as in b5007211b6 (pack-bitmap: do not use gcc packed > > attribute, 2014-11-27)), but that was due to a more odd-sized struct, as > > well as using sizeof(). > > How about a set of follow-up patches to address all of these spots at > the same time? That would allow us to move forward here (which is safe > to do, as you note), and address all of these instances together > uniformly. > > Sound good? That sounds fine to me. TBH, I am probably OK if that cleanup never happens, as long as nobody finds that it is a problem on there platform. I do wonder if we should provide more guidance about what is OK and what is not in CodingGuidelines, but I have a feeling it would end up to esoteric to be generally useful. -Peff