-
We handled the case of removing and re-inserting cache entries badly, which is something that merging commonly needs to do (removing the different stages, and then re-inserting one of them as the merged state). We even had a rather ugly special case for this failure case, where replace_index_entry() basically turned itself into a no-op if the new and the old entries were the same, exactly because the hash routines didn't handle it on their own. So what this patch does is to not just have the UNHASHED bit, but a HASHED bit too, and when you insert an entry into the name hash, that involves: - clear the UNHASHED bit, because now it's valid again for lookup (which is really all that UNHASHED meant) - if we're being lazy, we're done here (but we still want to clear the UNHASHED bit regardless of lazy mode, since we can become unlazy later, and so we need the UNHASHED bit to always be set correctly, even if we never actually insert the entry into the hash list) - if it was already hashed, we just leave it on the list - otherwise mark it HASHED and insert it into the list this all means that unhashing and rehashing a name all just works automatically. Obviously, you cannot change the name of an entry (that would be a serious bug), but nothing can validly do that anyway (you'd have to allocate a new struct cache_entry anyway since the name length could change), so that's not a new limitation. The code actually gets simpler in many ways, although the lazy hashing does mean that there are a few odd cases (ie something can be marked unhashed even though it was never on the hash in the first place, and isn't actually marked hashed!). Signed-off-by:
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org> Signed-off-by:
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
a22c6371
