Re: [PATCH v3 04/12] btrace: Use function segment index in call iterator.

[Simon Marchi <simon.marchi@polymtl.ca>]

On 2017-05-09 02:55, Tim Wiederhake wrote:
> Remove FUNCTION pointer in struct btrace_call_iterator and use an index 
> into
> the list of function segments instead.
> 
> 2017-05-09  Tim Wiederhake  <tim.wiederhake@intel.com>
> 
> gdb/ChangeLog:
> 
> 	* btrace.c (btrace_ends_with_single_insn): New function.
> 	(btrace_call_get, btrace_call_number, btrace_call_begin,
> 	btrace_call_end, btrace_call_next, btrace_call_prev,
> 	btrace_find_call_by_number): Use index into call segment vector
> 	instead of pointer.
> 	(btrace_call_cmp): Simplify.
> 	* btrace.h (struct btrace_call_iterator): Replace function call 
> segment
> 	pointer with index into vector.
> 	* record-btrace.c (record_btrace_call_history): Use index instead of
> 	pointer.
> 
> ---
>  gdb/btrace.c        | 198 
> ++++++++++++++++++++++------------------------------
>  gdb/btrace.h        |   5 +-
>  gdb/record-btrace.c |   2 +-
>  3 files changed, 87 insertions(+), 118 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/gdb/btrace.c b/gdb/btrace.c
> index c2d3730..5615aad 100644
> --- a/gdb/btrace.c
> +++ b/gdb/btrace.c
> @@ -2527,12 +2527,33 @@ btrace_find_insn_by_number (struct
> btrace_insn_iterator *it,
>    return 1;
>  }
> 
> +/* Returns a non-zero value if the recording ends with a function 
> segment that
> +   contains only a single (i.e. the current) instruction.  */
> +
> +static int

bool?

Otherwise, it LGTM.  I'm not familiar with the btrace specific 
computations, but it made sense to me.  I trust that you guys know what 
you are doing and have tested it enough :).

If I understand correctly, btrace_function::number is 1-based?  If so, 
it would be good to mention it somewhere (if it's not already, but I 
couldn't find it).

Thanks,

Simon