On Mon, Jan 20, 2025 at 04:47:47AM -0500, Karthik Nayak wrote: > Patrick Steinhardt <ps@xxxxxx> writes: > > diff --git a/reftable/record.c b/reftable/record.c > > index 04429d23fe..4e6541c307 100644 > > --- a/reftable/record.c > > +++ b/reftable/record.c > > @@ -21,47 +21,40 @@ static void *reftable_record_data(struct reftable_record *rec); > > > > int get_var_int(uint64_t *dest, struct string_view *in) > > { > > - int ptr = 0; > > + const unsigned char *buf = in->buf; > > + unsigned char c; > > uint64_t val; > > > > - if (in->len == 0) > > + if (!in->len) > > return -1; > > - val = in->buf[ptr] & 0x7f; > > - > > - while (in->buf[ptr] & 0x80) { > > - ptr++; > > - if (ptr > in->len) { > > + c = *buf++; > > + val = c & 0x7f; > > + > > + while (c & 0x80) { > > + val += 1; > > I was at first confused, I understand that we add 1 to check if there is > an overflow before adding the next section. But this actually modifies > the value itself, but looking below at `put_var_int()`, we did value-- > before storing each continuation byte. So during decoding. > > Nit: it would be nice to explain that part a bit here with comments. Yeah, I had to think about it a bit myself. It's quite a clever optimization: when the 0x80 bit is set, we know that the remaining value cannot be 0. We thus don't have to represent that value, which is why we can subtract 1 when encoding and re-add 1 when decoding. This allows us to save a byte in some edge cases. [snip] > > -int put_var_int(struct string_view *dest, uint64_t val) > > +int put_var_int(struct string_view *dest, uint64_t value) > > { > > - uint8_t buf[10] = { 0 }; > > - int i = 9; > > - int n = 0; > > - buf[i] = (uint8_t)(val & 0x7f); > > - i--; > > - while (1) { > > - val >>= 7; > > - if (!val) { > > - break; > > - } > > - val--; > > - buf[i] = 0x80 | (uint8_t)(val & 0x7f); > > - i--; > > - } > > - > > - n = sizeof(buf) - i - 1; > > - if (dest->len < n) > > + unsigned char varint[10]; > > + unsigned pos = sizeof(varint) - 1; > > + varint[pos] = value & 127; > > Nit: While the `get_var_int()` uses hexes, here we use ints. Would be > nicer to use `0x7f` and so on and be consistent. Yup, makes sense. > > + while (value >>= 7) > > + varint[--pos] = 128 | (--value & 127); > > + if (dest->len < sizeof(varint) - pos) > > return -1; > > - memcpy(dest->buf, &buf[i + 1], n); > > - return n; > > + memcpy(dest->buf, varint + pos, sizeof(varint) - pos); > > + return sizeof(varint) - pos; > > } > > > > int reftable_is_block_type(uint8_t typ) > > diff --git a/reftable/record.h b/reftable/record.h > > index a24cb23bd4..721d6c949a 100644 > > --- a/reftable/record.h > > +++ b/reftable/record.h > > @@ -34,6 +34,10 @@ static inline void string_view_consume(struct string_view *s, int n) > > > > /* utilities for de/encoding varints */ > > > > We should remove this, no? Yup, good catch. Patrick