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=-13.3 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_MED, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL 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 6C2D1C4338F for ; Thu, 19 Aug 2021 00:18:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 498DD610A6 for ; Thu, 19 Aug 2021 00:18:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S234474AbhHSASe (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Aug 2021 20:18:34 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:45340 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S233866AbhHSASe (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Aug 2021 20:18:34 -0400 Received: from mail-pj1-x1033.google.com (mail-pj1-x1033.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::1033]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DF1EDC061764 for ; Wed, 18 Aug 2021 17:17:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pj1-x1033.google.com with SMTP id oa17so3806966pjb.1 for ; Wed, 18 Aug 2021 17:17:58 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to; bh=t1qzoRiBceuqCTwQ7Bt+4GOeYiaBEbnQQfHFVhhnZi4=; b=WDpgP2KUAM21Vs6oeNrWfOWXPJctSligIgFSkj0VIXkuWiLEUWHFRvWLIVt8oo/dH0 vdRHzAJxsTc1Vgg2yC4DhFI+MCltxEMOkvidUpbMmbMtHNPq3HXa2rIfoWesq9K1R5hi kuDnMEMEwvvIb3E3ixSZUFu0bwNL8wlqoyEc8jdMkQA6vsNBAZPqdPhMKDIxgsKWTgit tRwfwFl1pRX7RQJf67qYiiuza07DhvCL+XCIjGb8R3l+x94BqQ3ldLXeKtyW3z0I28Lu 8B9B0OZ5mWXjiKKBhOPekagovPEkbpfwE0Kcr/Wgd94ldAjxFnqA8bCa3Dh158s2UmlG 6uOQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:content-transfer-encoding :in-reply-to; bh=t1qzoRiBceuqCTwQ7Bt+4GOeYiaBEbnQQfHFVhhnZi4=; b=EA8oL8ZJC63Ws3hUBFNlxqkOmQmGv8BUQha4SyARmiHqTbd3dBsF5ikX52pLGf7xQm Sp795E0PpzmVH+XV+kr54piUAu8HL4ctmaEpGzxk+9alnq7siGjUjmGzPk1MZEU3qfZM qi+9Y495Lky9+1smb7DEkM5lfPs7FMZNlb4tXTVzx4y+KRpq2Gco7c4bqBcKvjbJ89DX f8J+h1DSQj0oMRR2LnbktZhx04yVfh8HePdTvR+5rjXf/fQWpGVV9iiCCPbYwUjPB3l5 2hPwTSn11M8N8VrxHI4fKfMeDO0TqbkCXiKWJmRbwnMrD8anlf8BaHiR/AlEaP4osQ9F 14Vg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531NHag6ISpvJjmcz2Mf7O1AsodbuhHLW3iLmn7QROY+70y0IXig FeXhDY4zGL2/QKUtHe41JvVvAQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwBycecM9fbVEFis2RdVz87RD4GMKeSS1KN08qV+sr2WOK6dVAkra2Rt5P+JkOY176l7JoyRA== X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:7881:: with SMTP id x1mr12132938pjk.102.1629332278172; Wed, 18 Aug 2021 17:17:58 -0700 (PDT) Received: from google.com ([2620:15c:2ce:200:a999:9b6d:55c3:b66c]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 129sm962584pfg.50.2021.08.18.17.17.56 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 18 Aug 2021 17:17:57 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2021 17:17:49 -0700 From: Emily Shaffer To: =?iso-8859-1?Q?=C6var_Arnfj=F6r=F0?= Bjarmason Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Junio C Hamano , Jeff King , Taylor Blau , Felipe Contreras , Eric Sunshine , "brian m . carlson" , Josh Steadmon , Jonathan Tan , Derrick Stolee Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 00/36] Run hooks via "git run hook" & hook library Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Aug 03, 2021 at 09:38:26PM +0200, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote: > > This is a v4 re-roll of the "Base for "config-based-hooks" topic. I performed the rebase of my series on top of this one, and did not find very much objectionable there, but do not consider this email a thorough review of the interdiff. I expect to have time for that later in the week. > Other updates: > > * In the base topic the s/Signed-off-by/Reviewed-by/g from René > change that Junio applied locally has been folded in. > > * Almost all the callers were just "one-shot" callers, I introduced a > new run_hooks_oneshot() function for those, which gets rid of the > verbosity around memory management, see e.g. the "builtin/gc.c" in > the range-diff below. That run_hooks_oneshot() can also take a NULL > set of options. I am not so wild about this, to be honest, only because after my patch 2, it is hard to understand whether or not a hook is running in parallel or in series. It is extra code-reader overhead to know that run_hooks_oneshot() assumes that a hook can be parallelized, and I think that is unfortunate. But that is a pretty minor complaint, and I do like the lower complexity, and I agree the defaults are "good enough" for most hook events. So I guess I'm asking for ideas on how to make it more obvious what this oneshot call does in terms of parallelism. Thanks, and I hope to get to a fuller review of the interdiff soon. - Emily