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 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B887BCCA47C for ; Wed, 29 Jun 2022 20:40:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229615AbiF2Ukz (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Jun 2022 16:40:55 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:35252 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S230293AbiF2Ukx (ORCPT ); Wed, 29 Jun 2022 16:40:53 -0400 Received: from mail-qk1-x730.google.com (mail-qk1-x730.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::730]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D3B6718E39 for ; Wed, 29 Jun 2022 13:40:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-qk1-x730.google.com with SMTP id z16so8125054qkj.7 for ; Wed, 29 Jun 2022 13:40:51 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ttaylorr-com.20210112.gappssmtp.com; s=20210112; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=6yMvRdqJyvgBc/d30jp1bat2czQu0kPYcPRqYamF+80=; b=GesQYsaK7kjLxVsJZYrblswcB2dh9J9lAqquDCwBIyBwFKqmW5og6QFqduhQvNYQQd c3JO3GYxW6m/VO9tZo8i/Vw+PSi6XTYbyILm2YVujayAmLMqdD05EihOKSx/36rmGRXa MPOzkJDBUCf1g/26N1ozT/g/Sj84TfJBQPle0JAU9V+vMEvEqjPDDUWZpHdGGMN5CfVf E+r/fVzNhZha07gASFVqjYOYJYNq5iVzVxNcbFbENPdJLBXZfO56EIxnGlW5hsrx7RTQ EkfI7HSLZF5G2KMIL2niL0YCwCzQH1MR1EcJWejXCY9y9K08f/UpMTQZXQjSwg7HFyKG xyYQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=6yMvRdqJyvgBc/d30jp1bat2czQu0kPYcPRqYamF+80=; b=5Wy9tXgsqE0Re/0dzUoGIx7/mVeSueU9djPex6V/1giSmWqewNK87rhePdcYUd97Cw 9bTeALA9UuiARFBOovZGyTmePt0D5NQ/z+u6RqTczM26LyrXO90TLMAjFnOUyRe0MlMc 3pYK02LtwP32gIkQr0bD8CVnTwyL7gj/kvSHzuu7vJ7G882ivx67Pc+4/IoyXOYADT+/ QbXEARe3V3GQfVcjrHud2q95YZgGaH6sXgzqS431Dxr93prANGm6IwhUJ5DaMEytwPVO xWefAcW9k719x1NnefVauf/tavIHp09bsLLSW7tfEj6WjBJhjj4Kh4b+9uRVMkoZQ/3p PSXg== X-Gm-Message-State: AJIora8lruFdAPQvQZJyybHXCPKmZAjwzaA/ZA8DWBeG35sq+DaVvVlI uX83XTCDF5q9UV2iOmO7UDASlA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGRyM1sPji2SWhCu0MhwYoSpjOxOAbyA4OKK800g4wpF7Dg/6Y8Cy0tLiUNXUlbeMIGMXnMzLwCcnw== X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:2014:b0:6af:5eb:dff3 with SMTP id c20-20020a05620a201400b006af05ebdff3mr3682588qka.459.1656535250931; Wed, 29 Jun 2022 13:40:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (104-178-186-189.lightspeed.milwwi.sbcglobal.net. [104.178.186.189]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id l13-20020a05620a28cd00b006a6bbc2725esm14634105qkp.118.2022.06.29.13.40.50 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 29 Jun 2022 13:40:50 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2022 16:40:49 -0400 From: Taylor Blau To: Abhradeep Chakraborty Cc: Git , Kaartic Sivaraam , Derrick Stolee Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 5/6] bitmap-lookup-table: add performance tests for lookup table Message-ID: References: <20220628075843.19170-1-chakrabortyabhradeep79@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20220628075843.19170-1-chakrabortyabhradeep79@gmail.com> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jun 28, 2022 at 01:28:43PM +0530, Abhradeep Chakraborty wrote: > Taylor Blau wrote: > > > I think this "create tags" step can happen outside of the test_bitmap() > > function, since it should only need to be done once, right? > > Yeah, I also think the same. That's why I tried to not include in the > Function but for some reason, one test is failing - > > perf 24 - rev-list with tag negated via --not --all (objects): > running: > git rev-list perf-tag --not --all --use-bitmap-index --objects >/dev/null > > fatal: ambiguous argument 'perf-tag': unknown revision or path not in the working tree. > Use '--' to separate paths from revisions, like this: > 'git [...] -- [...]' > not ok 24 - rev-list with tag negated via --not --all (objects) > > One thing to note here is that the first `test_bitmap` call always > Passes. But the second `test_bitmap` call fails due to above error. > It throws error irrespective of any parameters for second `test_bitmap`. > > If I put it inside the function it doesn't throw any error! > > For this reason, I put it into the function. Do you have any idea > why this happend? I think that it's because we delete all of the refs in the test that creates a partial bitmap state. So anything that relies on perf-tag existing after that test runs will definitely not work :). My original suggestion was misguided there, unless we wanted to make the aforementioned test (the one that creates the partial bitmap state) restore the ref state after it finishes running, but I don't think that's worthwhile. Thanks, Taylor