|
|
|
#include <stdlib.h>
|
|
|
|
#include "cache.h"
|
|
|
|
#include "commit.h"
|
|
|
|
|
[PATCH] Speed up git-merge-base a lot
In commit 4f7eb2e5a351e0d1f19fd4eab7e92834cc4528c2 I fixed git-merge-base
getting confused by datestamps that caused it to traverse things in a
non-obvious order.
However, my fix was a very brute-force one, and it had some really
horrible implications for more complex trees with lots of parallell
development. It might end up traversing all the way to the root commit.
Now, normally that isn't that horrible: it's used mainly for merging, and
the bad cases really tend to happen fairly rarely, so if it takes a few
seconds, we're not in too bad shape.
However, gitk will also do the git-merge-base for every merge it shows,
because it basically re-does the trivial merge in order to show the
"interesting" parts. And there we'd really like the result to be
instantaneous.
This patch does that by walking the tree more completely, and using the
same heuristic as git-rev-list to decide "ok, the rest is uninteresting".
In one - hopefully fairly extreme - case, it made a git-merge-base go from
just under five seconds(!) to a tenth of a second on my machine.
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
20 years ago
|
|
|
#define PARENT1 1
|
|
|
|
#define PARENT2 2
|
|
|
|
#define UNINTERESTING 4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
static struct commit *interesting(struct commit_list *list)
|
[PATCH] Speed up git-merge-base a lot
In commit 4f7eb2e5a351e0d1f19fd4eab7e92834cc4528c2 I fixed git-merge-base
getting confused by datestamps that caused it to traverse things in a
non-obvious order.
However, my fix was a very brute-force one, and it had some really
horrible implications for more complex trees with lots of parallell
development. It might end up traversing all the way to the root commit.
Now, normally that isn't that horrible: it's used mainly for merging, and
the bad cases really tend to happen fairly rarely, so if it takes a few
seconds, we're not in too bad shape.
However, gitk will also do the git-merge-base for every merge it shows,
because it basically re-does the trivial merge in order to show the
"interesting" parts. And there we'd really like the result to be
instantaneous.
This patch does that by walking the tree more completely, and using the
same heuristic as git-rev-list to decide "ok, the rest is uninteresting".
In one - hopefully fairly extreme - case, it made a git-merge-base go from
just under five seconds(!) to a tenth of a second on my machine.
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
20 years ago
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
while (list) {
|
|
|
|
struct commit *commit = list->item;
|
|
|
|
list = list->next;
|
|
|
|
if (commit->object.flags & UNINTERESTING)
|
|
|
|
continue;
|
|
|
|
return commit;
|
[PATCH] Speed up git-merge-base a lot
In commit 4f7eb2e5a351e0d1f19fd4eab7e92834cc4528c2 I fixed git-merge-base
getting confused by datestamps that caused it to traverse things in a
non-obvious order.
However, my fix was a very brute-force one, and it had some really
horrible implications for more complex trees with lots of parallell
development. It might end up traversing all the way to the root commit.
Now, normally that isn't that horrible: it's used mainly for merging, and
the bad cases really tend to happen fairly rarely, so if it takes a few
seconds, we're not in too bad shape.
However, gitk will also do the git-merge-base for every merge it shows,
because it basically re-does the trivial merge in order to show the
"interesting" parts. And there we'd really like the result to be
instantaneous.
This patch does that by walking the tree more completely, and using the
same heuristic as git-rev-list to decide "ok, the rest is uninteresting".
In one - hopefully fairly extreme - case, it made a git-merge-base go from
just under five seconds(!) to a tenth of a second on my machine.
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
20 years ago
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
return NULL;
|
[PATCH] Speed up git-merge-base a lot
In commit 4f7eb2e5a351e0d1f19fd4eab7e92834cc4528c2 I fixed git-merge-base
getting confused by datestamps that caused it to traverse things in a
non-obvious order.
However, my fix was a very brute-force one, and it had some really
horrible implications for more complex trees with lots of parallell
development. It might end up traversing all the way to the root commit.
Now, normally that isn't that horrible: it's used mainly for merging, and
the bad cases really tend to happen fairly rarely, so if it takes a few
seconds, we're not in too bad shape.
However, gitk will also do the git-merge-base for every merge it shows,
because it basically re-does the trivial merge in order to show the
"interesting" parts. And there we'd really like the result to be
instantaneous.
This patch does that by walking the tree more completely, and using the
same heuristic as git-rev-list to decide "ok, the rest is uninteresting".
In one - hopefully fairly extreme - case, it made a git-merge-base go from
just under five seconds(!) to a tenth of a second on my machine.
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
20 years ago
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/*
|
|
|
|
* A pathological example of how this thing works.
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
* Suppose we had this commit graph, where chronologically
|
|
|
|
* the timestamp on the commit are A <= B <= C <= D <= E <= F
|
|
|
|
* and we are trying to figure out the merge base for E and F
|
|
|
|
* commits.
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
* F
|
|
|
|
* / \
|
|
|
|
* E A D
|
|
|
|
* \ / /
|
|
|
|
* B /
|
|
|
|
* \ /
|
|
|
|
* C
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
* First we push E and F to list to be processed. E gets bit 1
|
|
|
|
* and F gets bit 2. The list becomes:
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
* list=F(2) E(1), result=empty
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
* Then we pop F, the newest commit, from the list. Its flag is 2.
|
|
|
|
* We scan its parents, mark them reachable from the side that F is
|
|
|
|
* reachable from, and push them to the list:
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
* list=E(1) D(2) A(2), result=empty
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
* Next pop E and do the same.
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
* list=D(2) B(1) A(2), result=empty
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
* Next pop D and do the same.
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
* list=C(2) B(1) A(2), result=empty
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
* Next pop C and do the same.
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
* list=B(1) A(2), result=empty
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
* Now it is B's turn. We mark its parent, C, reachable from B's side,
|
|
|
|
* and push it to the list:
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
* list=C(3) A(2), result=empty
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
* Now pop C and notice it has flags==3. It is placed on the result list,
|
|
|
|
* and the list now contains:
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
* list=A(2), result=C(3)
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
* We pop A and do the same.
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
* list=B(3), result=C(3)
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
* Next, we pop B and something very interesting happens. It has flags==3
|
|
|
|
* so it is also placed on the result list, and its parents are marked
|
|
|
|
* uninteresting, retroactively, and placed back on the list:
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
* list=C(7), result=C(7) B(3)
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
* Now, list does not have any interesting commit. So we find the newest
|
|
|
|
* commit from the result list that is not marked uninteresting. Which is
|
|
|
|
* commit B.
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
* Another pathological example how this thing can fail to mark an ancestor
|
|
|
|
* of a merge base as UNINTERESTING without the postprocessing phase.
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
* 2
|
|
|
|
* H
|
|
|
|
* 1 / \
|
|
|
|
* G A \
|
|
|
|
* |\ / \
|
|
|
|
* | B \
|
|
|
|
* | \ \
|
|
|
|
* \ C F
|
|
|
|
* \ \ /
|
|
|
|
* \ D /
|
|
|
|
* \ | /
|
|
|
|
* \| /
|
|
|
|
* E
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
* list A B C D E F G H
|
|
|
|
* G1 H2 - - - - - - 1 2
|
|
|
|
* H2 E1 B1 - 1 - - 1 - 1 2
|
|
|
|
* F2 E1 B1 A2 2 1 - - 1 2 1 2
|
|
|
|
* E3 B1 A2 2 1 - - 3 2 1 2
|
|
|
|
* B1 A2 2 1 - - 3 2 1 2
|
|
|
|
* C1 A2 2 1 1 - 3 2 1 2
|
|
|
|
* D1 A2 2 1 1 1 3 2 1 2
|
|
|
|
* A2 2 1 1 1 3 2 1 2
|
|
|
|
* B3 2 3 1 1 3 2 1 2
|
|
|
|
* C7 2 3 7 1 3 2 1 2
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
* At this point, unfortunately, everybody in the list is
|
|
|
|
* uninteresting, so we fail to complete the following two
|
|
|
|
* steps to fully marking uninteresting commits.
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
* D7 2 3 7 7 3 2 1 2
|
|
|
|
* E7 2 3 7 7 7 2 1 2
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
|
|
* and we end up showing E as an interesting merge base.
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
static int show_all = 0;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
static void mark_reachable_commits(struct commit_list *result,
|
|
|
|
struct commit_list *list)
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
struct commit_list *tmp;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/*
|
|
|
|
* Postprocess to fully contaminate the well.
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
for (tmp = result; tmp; tmp = tmp->next) {
|
|
|
|
struct commit *c = tmp->item;
|
|
|
|
/* Reinject uninteresting ones to list,
|
|
|
|
* so we can scan their parents.
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
if (c->object.flags & UNINTERESTING)
|
|
|
|
commit_list_insert(c, &list);
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
while (list) {
|
|
|
|
struct commit *c = list->item;
|
|
|
|
struct commit_list *parents;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
tmp = list;
|
|
|
|
list = list->next;
|
|
|
|
free(tmp);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/* Anything taken out of the list is uninteresting, so
|
|
|
|
* mark all its parents uninteresting. We do not
|
|
|
|
* parse new ones (we already parsed all the relevant
|
|
|
|
* ones).
|
|
|
|
*/
|
|
|
|
parents = c->parents;
|
|
|
|
while (parents) {
|
|
|
|
struct commit *p = parents->item;
|
|
|
|
parents = parents->next;
|
|
|
|
if (!(p->object.flags & UNINTERESTING)) {
|
|
|
|
p->object.flags |= UNINTERESTING;
|
|
|
|
commit_list_insert(p, &list);
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
static int merge_base(struct commit *rev1, struct commit *rev2)
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
struct commit_list *list = NULL;
|
|
|
|
struct commit_list *result = NULL;
|
|
|
|
struct commit_list *tmp = NULL;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if (rev1 == rev2) {
|
|
|
|
printf("%s\n", sha1_to_hex(rev1->object.sha1));
|
|
|
|
return 0;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
parse_commit(rev1);
|
|
|
|
parse_commit(rev2);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
rev1->object.flags |= 1;
|
|
|
|
rev2->object.flags |= 2;
|
|
|
|
insert_by_date(rev1, &list);
|
|
|
|
insert_by_date(rev2, &list);
|
|
|
|
|
[PATCH] Speed up git-merge-base a lot
In commit 4f7eb2e5a351e0d1f19fd4eab7e92834cc4528c2 I fixed git-merge-base
getting confused by datestamps that caused it to traverse things in a
non-obvious order.
However, my fix was a very brute-force one, and it had some really
horrible implications for more complex trees with lots of parallell
development. It might end up traversing all the way to the root commit.
Now, normally that isn't that horrible: it's used mainly for merging, and
the bad cases really tend to happen fairly rarely, so if it takes a few
seconds, we're not in too bad shape.
However, gitk will also do the git-merge-base for every merge it shows,
because it basically re-does the trivial merge in order to show the
"interesting" parts. And there we'd really like the result to be
instantaneous.
This patch does that by walking the tree more completely, and using the
same heuristic as git-rev-list to decide "ok, the rest is uninteresting".
In one - hopefully fairly extreme - case, it made a git-merge-base go from
just under five seconds(!) to a tenth of a second on my machine.
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
20 years ago
|
|
|
while (interesting(list)) {
|
|
|
|
struct commit *commit = list->item;
|
|
|
|
struct commit_list *parents;
|
[PATCH] Speed up git-merge-base a lot
In commit 4f7eb2e5a351e0d1f19fd4eab7e92834cc4528c2 I fixed git-merge-base
getting confused by datestamps that caused it to traverse things in a
non-obvious order.
However, my fix was a very brute-force one, and it had some really
horrible implications for more complex trees with lots of parallell
development. It might end up traversing all the way to the root commit.
Now, normally that isn't that horrible: it's used mainly for merging, and
the bad cases really tend to happen fairly rarely, so if it takes a few
seconds, we're not in too bad shape.
However, gitk will also do the git-merge-base for every merge it shows,
because it basically re-does the trivial merge in order to show the
"interesting" parts. And there we'd really like the result to be
instantaneous.
This patch does that by walking the tree more completely, and using the
same heuristic as git-rev-list to decide "ok, the rest is uninteresting".
In one - hopefully fairly extreme - case, it made a git-merge-base go from
just under five seconds(!) to a tenth of a second on my machine.
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
20 years ago
|
|
|
int flags = commit->object.flags & 7;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
tmp = list;
|
|
|
|
list = list->next;
|
|
|
|
free(tmp);
|
[PATCH] Speed up git-merge-base a lot
In commit 4f7eb2e5a351e0d1f19fd4eab7e92834cc4528c2 I fixed git-merge-base
getting confused by datestamps that caused it to traverse things in a
non-obvious order.
However, my fix was a very brute-force one, and it had some really
horrible implications for more complex trees with lots of parallell
development. It might end up traversing all the way to the root commit.
Now, normally that isn't that horrible: it's used mainly for merging, and
the bad cases really tend to happen fairly rarely, so if it takes a few
seconds, we're not in too bad shape.
However, gitk will also do the git-merge-base for every merge it shows,
because it basically re-does the trivial merge in order to show the
"interesting" parts. And there we'd really like the result to be
instantaneous.
This patch does that by walking the tree more completely, and using the
same heuristic as git-rev-list to decide "ok, the rest is uninteresting".
In one - hopefully fairly extreme - case, it made a git-merge-base go from
just under five seconds(!) to a tenth of a second on my machine.
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
20 years ago
|
|
|
if (flags == 3) {
|
|
|
|
insert_by_date(commit, &result);
|
[PATCH] Speed up git-merge-base a lot
In commit 4f7eb2e5a351e0d1f19fd4eab7e92834cc4528c2 I fixed git-merge-base
getting confused by datestamps that caused it to traverse things in a
non-obvious order.
However, my fix was a very brute-force one, and it had some really
horrible implications for more complex trees with lots of parallell
development. It might end up traversing all the way to the root commit.
Now, normally that isn't that horrible: it's used mainly for merging, and
the bad cases really tend to happen fairly rarely, so if it takes a few
seconds, we're not in too bad shape.
However, gitk will also do the git-merge-base for every merge it shows,
because it basically re-does the trivial merge in order to show the
"interesting" parts. And there we'd really like the result to be
instantaneous.
This patch does that by walking the tree more completely, and using the
same heuristic as git-rev-list to decide "ok, the rest is uninteresting".
In one - hopefully fairly extreme - case, it made a git-merge-base go from
just under five seconds(!) to a tenth of a second on my machine.
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
20 years ago
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/* Mark parents of a found merge uninteresting */
|
[PATCH] Speed up git-merge-base a lot
In commit 4f7eb2e5a351e0d1f19fd4eab7e92834cc4528c2 I fixed git-merge-base
getting confused by datestamps that caused it to traverse things in a
non-obvious order.
However, my fix was a very brute-force one, and it had some really
horrible implications for more complex trees with lots of parallell
development. It might end up traversing all the way to the root commit.
Now, normally that isn't that horrible: it's used mainly for merging, and
the bad cases really tend to happen fairly rarely, so if it takes a few
seconds, we're not in too bad shape.
However, gitk will also do the git-merge-base for every merge it shows,
because it basically re-does the trivial merge in order to show the
"interesting" parts. And there we'd really like the result to be
instantaneous.
This patch does that by walking the tree more completely, and using the
same heuristic as git-rev-list to decide "ok, the rest is uninteresting".
In one - hopefully fairly extreme - case, it made a git-merge-base go from
just under five seconds(!) to a tenth of a second on my machine.
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
20 years ago
|
|
|
flags |= UNINTERESTING;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
parents = commit->parents;
|
|
|
|
while (parents) {
|
|
|
|
struct commit *p = parents->item;
|
|
|
|
parents = parents->next;
|
|
|
|
if ((p->object.flags & flags) == flags)
|
|
|
|
continue;
|
|
|
|
parse_commit(p);
|
|
|
|
p->object.flags |= flags;
|
|
|
|
insert_by_date(p, &list);
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if (!result)
|
|
|
|
return 1;
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
if (result->next && list)
|
|
|
|
mark_reachable_commits(result, list);
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
while (result) {
|
|
|
|
struct commit *commit = result->item;
|
|
|
|
result = result->next;
|
|
|
|
if (commit->object.flags & UNINTERESTING)
|
|
|
|
continue;
|
|
|
|
printf("%s\n", sha1_to_hex(commit->object.sha1));
|
|
|
|
if (!show_all)
|
|
|
|
return 0;
|
|
|
|
commit->object.flags |= UNINTERESTING;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
return 0;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
static const char merge_base_usage[] =
|
|
|
|
"git-merge-base [--all] <commit-id> <commit-id>";
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
int main(int argc, char **argv)
|
|
|
|
{
|
|
|
|
struct commit *rev1, *rev2;
|
|
|
|
unsigned char rev1key[20], rev2key[20];
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
while (1 < argc && argv[1][0] == '-') {
|
|
|
|
char *arg = argv[1];
|
|
|
|
if (!strcmp(arg, "-a") || !strcmp(arg, "--all"))
|
|
|
|
show_all = 1;
|
|
|
|
else
|
|
|
|
usage(merge_base_usage);
|
|
|
|
argc--; argv++;
|
|
|
|
}
|
|
|
|
if (argc != 3 ||
|
|
|
|
get_sha1(argv[1], rev1key) ||
|
|
|
|
get_sha1(argv[2], rev2key))
|
|
|
|
usage(merge_base_usage);
|
|
|
|
rev1 = lookup_commit_reference(rev1key);
|
|
|
|
rev2 = lookup_commit_reference(rev2key);
|
|
|
|
if (!rev1 || !rev2)
|
|
|
|
return 1;
|
|
|
|
return merge_base(rev1, rev2);
|
|
|
|
}
|