run-command: add an "ungroup" option to run_process_parallel()

Extend the parallel execution API added in c553c72eed6 (run-command:
add an asynchronous parallel child processor, 2015-12-15) to support a
mode where the stdout and stderr of the processes isn't captured and
output in a deterministic order, instead we'll leave it to the kernel
and stdio to sort it out.

This gives the API same functionality as GNU parallel's --ungroup
option. As we'll see in a subsequent commit the main reason to want
this is to support stdout and stderr being connected to the TTY in the
case of jobs=1, demonstrated here with GNU parallel:

	$ parallel --ungroup 'test -t {} && echo TTY || echo NTTY' ::: 1 2
	TTY
	TTY
	$ parallel 'test -t {} && echo TTY || echo NTTY' ::: 1 2
	NTTY
	NTTY

Another is as GNU parallel's documentation notes a potential for
optimization. As demonstrated in next commit our results with "git
hook run" will be similar, but generally speaking this shows that if
you want to run processes in parallel where the exact order isn't
important this can be a lot faster:

	$ hyperfine -r 3 -L o ,--ungroup 'parallel {o} seq ::: 10000000 >/dev/null '
	Benchmark 1: parallel  seq ::: 10000000 >/dev/null
	  Time (mean ± σ):     220.2 ms ±   9.3 ms    [User: 124.9 ms, System: 96.1 ms]
	  Range (min … max):   212.3 ms … 230.5 ms    3 runs

	Benchmark 2: parallel --ungroup seq ::: 10000000 >/dev/null
	  Time (mean ± σ):     154.7 ms ±   0.9 ms    [User: 136.2 ms, System: 25.1 ms]
	  Range (min … max):   153.9 ms … 155.7 ms    3 runs

	Summary
	  'parallel --ungroup seq ::: 10000000 >/dev/null ' ran
	    1.42 ± 0.06 times faster than 'parallel  seq ::: 10000000 >/dev/null '

A large part of the juggling in the API is to make the API safer for
its maintenance and consumers alike.

For the maintenance of the API we e.g. avoid malloc()-ing the
"pp->pfd", ensuring that SANITIZE=address and other similar tools will
catch any unexpected misuse.

For API consumers we take pains to never pass the non-NULL "out"
buffer to an API user that provided the "ungroup" option. The
resulting code in t/helper/test-run-command.c isn't typical of such a
user, i.e. they'd typically use one mode or the other, and would know
whether they'd provided "ungroup" or not.

We could also avoid the strbuf_init() for "buffered_output" by having
"struct parallel_processes" use a static PARALLEL_PROCESSES_INIT
initializer, but let's leave that cleanup for later.

Using a global "run_processes_parallel_ungroup" variable to enable
this option is rather nasty, but is being done here to produce as
minimal of a change as possible for a subsequent regression fix. This
change is extracted from a larger initial version[1] which ends up
with a better end-state for the API, but in doing so needed to modify
all existing callers of the API. Let's defer that for now, and
narrowly focus on what we need for fixing the regression in the
subsequent commit.

It's safe to do this with a global variable because:

 A) hook.c is the only user of it that sets it to non-zero, and before
    we'll get any other API users we'll refactor away this method of
    passing in the option, i.e. re-roll [1].

 B) Even if hook.c wasn't the only user we don't have callers of this
    API that concurrently invoke this parallel process starting API
    itself in parallel.

As noted above "A" && "B" are rather nasty, and we don't want to live
with those caveats long-term, but for now they should be an acceptable
compromise.

1. https://lore.kernel.org/git/cover-v2-0.8-00000000000-20220518T195858Z-avarab@gmail.com/

Signed-off-by: Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>

0 files changed, 0 insertions, 0 deletions