This is the mail archive of the
gdb-patches@sourceware.org
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [PATCH v3 09/12] btrace: Remove struct btrace_thread_info::flow.
The title should mention btrace_function::flow instead of
btrace_thread_info::flow. I just realized the previous patch has the
same issue.
On 2017-05-09 02:55, Tim Wiederhake wrote:
This used to hold a pair of pointers to the previous and next function
segment
in execution flow order. It is no longer necessary as the previous and
next
function segments now are simply the previous and next elements in the
vector
of function segments.
2017-05-09 Tim Wiederhake <tim.wiederhake@intel.com>
gdb/ChangeLog:
* btrace.c (ftrace_new_function, ftrace_fixup_level,
ftrace_connect_bfun, ftrace_bridge_gap, btrace_bridge_gaps,
btrace_insn_next, btrace_insn_prev): Remove references to
btrace_thread_info::flow.
btrace_function::flow.
* btrace.h (struct btrace_function): Remove FLOW.
The patch LGTM, but I have one question. Did you consider adding a
backlink in btrace_function to its btrace_thread_info owner? It would
possible to implement gap->next () and gap->prev (), which could be used
in many places, and would probably be more readable than
ftrace_find_call_by_number (btinfo, gap->number - 1)
ftrace_find_call_by_number (btinfo, gap->number + 1)
And it could possibly bring more simplifications, I didn't look in
details.
Thanks,
Simon