tree 8f237bb1242f17dca5efbc1c1fbd72f3b4036cec
parent 3ca2882ceb34d9e515ba088d9b0a2e7523de5706
author Jason Bedard <jason+github@jbedard.ca> 1756306440 -0700
committer GitHub <noreply@github.com> 1756306440 -0700
gpgsig -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
 
 wsFcBAABCAAQBQJorxwICRC1aQ7uu5UhlAAA+LwQAGEFgMZxKh0iBTk2DLJf67Jf
 puLDD7lyOEN/z5c31awyCx2ldxP3Gnp403wgxHC+9RdSHodFsR+rRBfSnD5M3LKN
 5+2YLXg4SSMx4C0TC4BHq9Kc/BE+1XlapkFT8ENK1WJn27392oeKZ2HtTUYvCmw+
 jcKMUMPkHlVZ79S5FgyknA5AWhYZgAZi1BbtGDKIZvBSCcedDBLs8Ax2mGgBB2PO
 YMkQqrcoeqvucrziqkuRbNlBXS/bZ65mWRZ4v9u+ILwbMkwug0oUHG9B9PPs9cW/
 MwgA80wBtk5isnthPL1N3lNO3NOwgjlSSmSJ1tg0OlEDQglCfpaM6qVNg/NqP1yA
 A28CW5xdd/G4wagwqKh1MwAvSi3OlXXztvwPfqzTPcUCsgXm3GneC4sDtc2myf1X
 S8qtdmE732gporwA7YGNdnDux6Iu1bDZQdU3geJU61QQwyPniUyp+dttjQKaiUKr
 BxLmg3l/duiyzRpRM4UU8XO3FQ4eRM7CGzS2YLgKGORpXaPFFxtkZmKPcRbhQcew
 BJiZfBbZbaiNhTO/YxCQgVOnX2TR3aV/jVBnABNCKDQdUdRIJsbDrfUhQDSIpezr
 Rt0gLsiylXHzZjdXydUfpMlE4nu30zXI5Zo2ONOlz0a0BmBn1jRfYJy3K6vXSxt8
 25BqELROaf/YPhvHnnre
 =dNjb
 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
 

perf: populate walk cache in background (#2161)

Is there any reason to block waiting on this? We can most likely start
`visit()`ing directories in parallel while the cache population is done
async in the background...

Normally the cache population will always be a step (or many steps)
ahead of `visit()` and this change should only make the 2 traversals
overlap but introduce no change to who fills the cache or what order it
is filled. The only scenario I can think of where `populateCache()`
would no longer be the first to fill the cache would be if a language
callback invokes `GetDirInfo`?

**What type of PR is this?**

Other

**What package or component does this PR mostly affect?**

all

**What does this PR do? Why is it needed?**

**Which issues(s) does this PR fix?**

**Other notes for review**