Re: [RFA] Fix off-by-one error in record.c (record_list_release_first)

Michael Snyder
2009-10-15T16:53:11Z

OK, going to commit it.

Hui Zhu wrote:
> Thanks Michael, I think this patch is OK with me.
>
> Hui
>
> On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 02:01, Michael Snyder <msnyder@vmware.com> wrote:
>> Hui Zhu wrote:
>>> Thanks Michael and Jilin,
>>>
>>> I think the Michael's patch is more spend up. Jilin's patch is more
>>> clear and can handle set_record_insn_max_num.
>>>
>>> I suggest we choice speed up. Do you think it's OK?
>>>
>>> If we choice it, Michael, could you please add some comments to
>>> "record_list_release_first" or change it's name to
>>> "record_list_release_first_without_update_xxx" to make it clear.
>>> And please update set_record_insn_max_num.
>> Hah, sorry, I completely missed the implications for
>> set_record_insn_max_num. Thanks Jilin for catching it.
>>
>> New diff:
>>
>>
>> 2009-10-12 Michael Snyder <msnyder@vmware.com>
>>
>> * record.c (record_list_release_first): Do not decrement
>> record_insn_num.
>> (set_insn_num_max): Remove printf.
>> Decrement record_insn_num in the loop.
>>
>> Index: record.c
>> ===================================================================
>> RCS file: /cvs/src/src/gdb/record.c,v
>> retrieving revision 1.20
>> diff -u -p -r1.20 record.c
>> --- record.c 27 Sep 2009 02:49:34 -0000 1.20
>> +++ record.c 13 Oct 2009 18:04:44 -0000
>> @@ -177,6 +177,11 @@ record_list_release_next (void)
>> }
>> }
>>
>> +/* Delete the first instruction from the beginning of the log, to make
>> + room for adding a new instruction at the end of the log.
>> +
>> + Note -- this function does not modify record_insn_num. */
>> +
>> static void
>> record_list_release_first (void)
>> {
>> @@ -209,8 +214,6 @@ record_list_release_first (void)
>> if (type == record_end)
>> break;
>> }
>> -
>> - record_insn_num--;
>> }
>>
>> /* Add a struct record_entry to record_arch_list. */
>> @@ -1260,12 +1263,12 @@ set_record_insn_max_num (char *args, int
>> {
>> if (record_insn_num > record_insn_max_num && record_insn_max_num)
>> {
>> - printf_unfiltered (_("Record instructions number is bigger than "
>> - "record instructions max number. Auto delete "
>> - "the first ones?\n"));
>> -
>> + /* Count down record_insn_num while releasing records from list. */
>> while (record_insn_num > record_insn_max_num)
>> - record_list_release_first ();
>> + {
>> + record_list_release_first ();
>> + record_insn_num--;
>> + }
>> }
>> }
>>
>>
>>