rmustacc commented on this pull request.
> @@ -198,6 +204,100 @@ write_uint64(mdb_tgt_as_t as, mdb_tgt_addr_t addr,
> uint64_t n, uint_t rdback)
return (addr + sizeof (n));
}
+/*
+ * Writes to objects of size 1, 2, 4, or 8 bytes. The function
+ * doesn't care if the object is a number or not (e.g. it could
+ * be a byte array, or a struct) as long as the size of the write
+ * is one of the aforementioned ones.
+ */
+static mdb_tgt_addr_t
+write_var_uint(mdb_tgt_as_t as, mdb_tgt_addr_t addr, uint64_t val, size_t size,
+ uint_t rdback)
+{
+ if (size > MDB_UINT_WRITE_MAXBYTES) {
Looking at this again, given that we are checking the size down below and
adjusting it based on a uint64_t do we actually need this block here? I just
realized given that we'll check the size in the switch statement, it may end up
being redundant. But, honestly, it doesn't matter either way.
--
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/openzfs/openzfs/pull/544#pullrequestreview-96594391
------------------------------------------
openzfs-developer
Archives:
https://openzfs.topicbox.com/groups/developer/discussions/Ta82fe96bb714cae3-M3440619a9871a4154a7bca7e
Powered by Topicbox: https://topicbox.com
