Re: [RFH] two and half potential fixlets to the in-core index handling

Linus Torvalds [off-list ref] writes:

On Sat, 23 Aug 2008, Junio C Hamano wrote:

quoted

A hacky solution I have in the attached patch is to waste an xmalloc(1)
and store it there when o->result is created, and also make
read_from_index() pay attention to the cache_nr and the cache_changed
bit. I think it is the safest and minimum fix.

Hmm. Wouldn't it be nicer to just add another bit to istate? We have the 
space already, since we already have a bitfield there, with just one bit 
used?

cache_changed can also become a single-bit field.

The oldest "the_index" users work from it in the BSS initialized all
zero.  We'd also need to mark it as initialized, wouldn't we?