this meant to abstract the sumtype representation required
to transfert `offcode` to `ZSTD_storeSeq()`.
Unfortunately, the sumtype numeric representation is currently a leaky abstraction
that has permeated many other parts of the code,
especially within `zstd_lazy.c` and also within `zstd_opt.c` and `zstd_compress.c`.
While this PR makes a good job a transfering a large nb of call sites
to using the new macros, there are still a few sites where this transformation is more complex,
or where the numeric representation itself it used "as is".
One of the problematics area is the decision to use the numeric format of the sumtype
within the match finders of `zstd_lazy`.
This commit doesn't change the behavior, it only introduces and employes the macros,
but eventually the resulting code remains identical.
At target, if the numeric representation of the sumtype can be completely abstracted
and no other part of the code depends on it,
it will be possible to move it towards something slightly more efficient.
since this is effectively what is stored in this field (== matchLength - MINMATCH).
This makes it clearer what needs to be done when reading from / writing to this field.
I hadn't seen #2890, so I wrote my own version. I like this approach a little
better, since it does an explicit check for a regular file, rather than
passing a magic value.
Addresses #2874.
short-tests-0 were silently failing. I think because of the && make clean construction. Switch to ; instead.
Also fix all the test failures that were exposed.
`make all` is failing on CircleCI because it is missing Docker. Move that test
to GitHub actions, and switch the pedantic CircleCI test to `make allmost`.
51 MB seems excessive for CI storate and considering the nature of the test.
(note : maybe we should consider using `/tmp` for files generated during tests,
as tmpfs is typically using RAM, thus preserving storage.)
Tests that libzstd.so doesn't have the exec-stack bit set using
readelf. If the stack is marked executable systemd will refuse
to link against zstd. We now test that it isn't set on every PR.
Adds a test for PR #2857
Fixes Issue #2865
Allow the `dictContentSize` to be any size. The finalized dictionary
content size must be at least as large as the maximum repcode (8). So we
add zero bytes to the dictionary to ensure that we meet that
requirement.
I've removed this restriction because its been causing us headaches when
people complain that dictionary training failed. It fails because there
isn't enough useful content to put in the dictionary. Either because
every sample is exactly the same and less than ZDICT_CONTENTSIZE_MIN bytes,
or there isn't enough content. Instead, we should succeed in creating
the dictionary, and it is up to the user to decide if it is worthwhile.
It is possible that the tables alone provide enough value.
NOTE: This allows us to produce dictionaries with finalized
`dictContentSize < ZDICT_CONTENTSIZE_MIN`. But, they are still valid
zstd dictionaries. We could remove the `ZDICT_CONTENTSIZE_MIN` macro,
but I've decided to leave that for now, so we don't break users.
Fix underflow of `nbCompares` by switching to an `int` and comparing
`nbCompares > 0`. This is a minimal fix, because I don't want to change
the logic. These loops seem to be doing `nbCompares + 1` comparisons.
The bug was reported by Dan Carpenter and found by Smatch static
checker.
https://lore.kernel.org/all/20211008063704.GA5370@kili/
