Re: [PATCH v3 2/3] sha1_file: open window into packfiles with O_CLOEXEC

Jeff King [off-list ref] writes:

Of the two flags, I would say CLOEXEC is the more important one to
respect because it may actually impact correctness (e.g., leaking
descriptors to sub-processes). Whereas O_NOATIME is purely a performance
optimization.

I tend to agree.

I actually wonder if it is worth carrying around the O_NOATIME hack at
all.

Yes, I share the thought.  We no longer have too many loose objects
to matter.

I do not mind flipping the order, but I'd prefer to cook the result
even longer.  I am tempted to suggest we take two step route:

 - ship 2.11 with the "atime has been there and we won't regress it"
   shape, while cooking the "cloexec is semantically more
   important" version in 'next' during the feature freeze

 - immediately after 2.11 merge it to 'master' for 2.12 to make sure
   there is no fallout.

On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 10:52:41AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:

quoted

I actually wonder if it is worth carrying around the O_NOATIME hack at
all.

Yes, I share the thought.  We no longer have too many loose objects
to matter.

I do not mind flipping the order, but I'd prefer to cook the result
even longer.  I am tempted to suggest we take two step route:

 - ship 2.11 with the "atime has been there and we won't regress it"
   shape, while cooking the "cloexec is semantically more
   important" version in 'next' during the feature freeze

 - immediately after 2.11 merge it to 'master' for 2.12 to make sure
   there is no fallout.

That sounds reasonable, though I'd consider jumping straight to "NOATIME
is not worth it; drop it" as the patch for post-2.11.

-Peff