Re: [PATCH v2 8/8] rev-list: allow filtering of provided items
flat view
From: Jeff King <hidden>
Date: 2021-04-06 18:04:19
On Mon, Mar 15, 2021 at 02:15:05PM +0100, Patrick Steinhardt wrote:
When providing an object filter, it is currently impossible to also filter provided items. E.g. when executing `git rev-list HEAD` , the commit this reference points to will be treated as user-provided and is thus excluded from the filtering mechanism. This makes it harder than necessary to properly use the new `--filter=object:type` filter given that even if the user wants to only see blobs, he'll still see commits of provided references. Improve this by introducing a new `--filter-provided` option to the git-rev-parse(1) command. If given, then all user-provided references will be subject to filtering.
I think this option is a good thing to have. The name seems a little confusing to me, as I can read is as both "please filter the provided objects" and "a filter has been provided". I guess "--filter-print-provided" would be more clear. And also the default, so you'd want "--no-filter-print-provided". That's kind of clunky, though. Maybe "--filter-omit-provided"?
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
@@ -694,6 +698,16 @@ int cmd_rev_list(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix) return show_bisect_vars(&info, reaches, all); } + if (filter_options.filter_wants) { + struct commit_list *c; + for (i = 0; i < revs.pending.nr; i++) { + struct object_array_entry *pending = revs.pending.objects + i; + pending->item->flags |= NOT_USER_GIVEN; + } + for (c = revs.commits; c; c = c->next) + c->item->object.flags |= NOT_USER_GIVEN; + }
You store the flag inside the filter_options struct, which implies to me that it's something that could be applied per-filter (at least in theory; the command line option doesn't allow us to distinguish). But here you treat it as a global flag that munges the NOT_USER_GIVEN flags. Given that it's inside the filter_options struct, and that you propagate it via transform_to_combine_type(), I'd have expected the LOFC code to look at the flag and decide to ignore the whole user-given concept completely. To be clear, I don't mind at all having it as a global that applies to all filters. I don't think the flexibility buys us anything. But since it only applies to rev-list, why not just make it a global option within rev-list? And then these hunks:
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
diff --git a/list-objects-filter-options.c b/list-objects-filter-options.c index bb6f6577d5..2877aa9e96 100644 --- a/list-objects-filter-options.c +++ b/list-objects-filter-options.c@@ -242,6 +242,7 @@ static void transform_to_combine_type( memset(filter_options, 0, sizeof(*filter_options)); filter_options->sub = sub_array; filter_options->sub_alloc = initial_sub_alloc; + filter_options->filter_wants = sub_array[0].filter_wants; } filter_options->sub_nr = 1; filter_options->choice = LOFC_COMBINE;@@ -290,6 +291,9 @@ void parse_list_objects_filter( parse_error = gently_parse_list_objects_filter( &filter_options->sub[filter_options->sub_nr - 1], arg, &errbuf); + if (!parse_error) + filter_options->sub[filter_options->sub_nr - 1].filter_wants = + filter_options->filter_wants; } if (parse_error) die("%s", errbuf.buf);diff --git a/list-objects-filter-options.h b/list-objects-filter-options.h index 4d0d0588cc..5e609e307a 100644 --- a/list-objects-filter-options.h +++ b/list-objects-filter-options.h@@ -42,6 +42,12 @@ struct list_objects_filter_options { */ enum list_objects_filter_choice choice; + /* + * "--filter-provided" was given by the user, instructing us to also + * filter all explicitly provided objects. + */ + unsigned int filter_wants : 1; + /* * Choice is LOFC_DISABLED because "--no-filter" was requested. */
would not be needed at all.
quoted hunk ↗ jump to hunk
diff --git a/pack-bitmap.c b/pack-bitmap.c index e33805e076..5ff800316b 100644 --- a/pack-bitmap.c +++ b/pack-bitmap.c@@ -1101,7 +1101,8 @@ struct bitmap_index *prepare_bitmap_walk(struct rev_info *revs, if (haves_bitmap) bitmap_and_not(wants_bitmap, haves_bitmap); - filter_bitmap(bitmap_git, wants, wants_bitmap, filter); + filter_bitmap(bitmap_git, (filter && filter->filter_wants) ? NULL : wants, + wants_bitmap, filter); bitmap_git->result = wants_bitmap; bitmap_git->haves = haves_bitmap;
I guess we'd need to pass that flag into prepare_bitmap_walk() here so it knows not to bother with the wants-filtering. But that seems less bad that stuffing it into the filter struct. -Peff