In
652bd0211d (rebase: use 'skip_cache_tree_update' option, 2022-11-10),
we updated `reset_head()` to stop updating the index tree cache. This
was done as a performance optimization: the function is only called by
"sequencer.c" and "rebase.c", both of which assume a clean index before
they perform their operation, so we know that the end result will be a
clean index, too. Consequently, we can skip recomputing the cache as we
can instead use `prime_cache_tree()` directly.
In a subsequent commit we're about to add a new caller though where the
assumption doesn't hold anymore: the index may be dirty before calling
`reset_head()`, and consequently we cannot prime the cache with a given
tree anymore as the index and tree will mismatch.
Adapt the logic so that we only skip the cache tree update in case we're
doing a hard reset. While we could introduce logic that only skips the
update in case the incoming index was dirty already, that doesn't really
feel worth it: after all, the mentioned commit says itself that the
performance improvement was negligible anyway.
Signed-off-by: Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
unpack_tree_opts.dry_run = dry_run;
unpack_tree_opts.merge = 1;
unpack_tree_opts.preserve_ignored = 0; /* FIXME: !overwrite_ignore */
- unpack_tree_opts.skip_cache_tree_update = 1;
init_checkout_metadata(&unpack_tree_opts.meta, switch_to_branch, oid, NULL);
- if (reset_hard)
+ if (reset_hard) {
+ unpack_tree_opts.skip_cache_tree_update = 1;
unpack_tree_opts.reset = UNPACK_RESET_PROTECT_UNTRACKED;
+ }
if (!reset_hard && !fill_tree_descriptor(r, &desc[nr++], &head_oid)) {
ret = error(_("failed to find tree of %s"),
goto leave_reset_head;
}
- prime_cache_tree(r, r->index, tree);
+ if (reset_hard)
+ prime_cache_tree(r, r->index, tree);
if (write_locked_index(r->index, &lock, COMMIT_LOCK) < 0) {
ret = error(_("could not write index"));