Browse Source
The rule has always been that a cache entry that is ce_uptodate(ce) means that we already have checked the work tree entity and we know there is no change in the work tree compared to the index, and nobody should have to double check. Note that false ce_uptodate(ce) does not mean it is known to be dirty---it only means we don't know if it is clean. There are a few codepaths (refresh-index and preload-index are among them) that mark a cache entry as up-to-date based solely on the return value from ie_match_stat(); this function uses lstat() to see if the work tree entity has been touched, and for a submodule entry, if its HEAD points at the same commit as the commit recorded in the index of the superproject (a submodule that is not even cloned is considered clean). A submodule is no longer considered unmodified merely because its HEAD matches the index of the superproject these days, in order to prevent people from forgetting to commit in the submodule and updating the superproject index with the new submodule commit, before commiting the state in the superproject. However, the patch to do so didn't update the codepath that marks cache entries up-to-date based on the updated definition and instead worked it around by saying "we don't trust the return value of ce_uptodate() for submodules." This makes ce_uptodate() trustworthy again by not marking submodule entries up-to-date. The next step _could_ be to introduce a few "in-core" flag bits to cache_entry structure to record "this entry is _known_ to be dirty", call is_submodule_modified() from ie_match_stat(), and use these new bits to avoid running this rather expensive check more than once, but that can be a separate patch. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>maint
Junio C Hamano
15 years ago
3 changed files with 7 additions and 3 deletions
Loading…
Reference in new issue