On Tue 16 Jan 2018 11:26:40 PM CET, Eric Blake wrote:
>> /* allocate a new entry in the l2 cache */
>>
>> + slice_size = s->l2_slice_size * sizeof(uint64_t);
>
> Would this read any better if the earlier patch named it
> s->l2_slice_entries?
I had doubts with this. Like you, when I see size I tend to think about
bytes. However both s->l1_size and s->l2_size indicate entries, and the
documentation of the qcow2 format even describes the header field like
this:
36 - 39: l1_size
Number of entries in the active L1 table
So I decided to follow that same convention for l2_slice_size.
For the local variable I could call it slice_size_bytes or try to come
up with a different alternative, but I'm open to suggestions.
Berto
