Re: [PATCH 3/3] odb: drop gaps in object info flag values
From: René Scharfe <hidden>
Date: 2026-01-26 18:02:20
On 1/26/26 5:58 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Patrick Steinhardt [off-list ref] writes:quoted
+enum object_info_flags { + /* Invoke lookup_replace_object() on the given hash. */ + OBJECT_INFO_LOOKUP_REPLACE = (1 << 0), + + /* Do not reprepare object sources when the first lookup has failed. */ + OBJECT_INFO_QUICK = (1 << 1), + + /* + * Do not attempt to fetch the object if missing (even if fetch_is_missing is + * nonzero). + */ + OBJECT_INFO_SKIP_FETCH_OBJECT = (1 << 2), + + /* Die if object corruption (not just an object being missing) was detected. */ + OBJECT_INFO_DIE_IF_CORRUPT = (1 << 3), -/* Die if object corruption (not just an object being missing) was detected. */ -#define OBJECT_INFO_DIE_IF_CORRUPT 32 + /* + * This is meant for bulk prefetching of missing blobs in a partial + * clone. Implies OBJECT_INFO_SKIP_FETCH_OBJECT and OBJECT_INFO_QUICK. + */ + OBJECT_INFO_FOR_PREFETCH = (OBJECT_INFO_SKIP_FETCH_OBJECT | OBJECT_INFO_QUICK), +}; /* * Read object info from the object database and populate the `object_info`I wonder if this series can be restructured a bit to demonstrate the benefit of moving to enum a bit more prominently. For example, even at the end of the three patches, odb_read_object_info_extended() still takes an "unsigned flags" parameter, but it is meant to take this new enum, isn't it? If we do the "#define to enum" conversion (without renumbering) first, then "unsigned to enum", would it, with appropriate compiler warning flags, already reveal the existing bugs that happened to be working OK as potential problems? And with that, fixes in 1/3 and 2/3 would demonstrate why #define to enum" is worth doing very well. And after all that, we can renumber the enums in a separate and final step.
With -Wenum-conversion you can get GCC to report implicit conversions between different enum types (like in the backfill case), but I don't see a way to warn about conversions from int (the fsck case). https://stackoverflow.com/questions/4669454/how-to-make-gcc-warn-about-passing-wrong-enum-to-a-function suggests using -Wenum-compare and macros to sneak in a comparison, but that doesn't seem to catch more than -Wenum-conversion, which doesn't need any macros. https://godbolt.org/z/Whvc7Mf1n Perhaps sparse can do that? René