Re: [PATCH 3/3] doc, record: document record changes

[Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>]

> From: "Metzger, Markus T" <markus.t.metzger@intel.com>
> CC: "jan.kratochvil@redhat.com" <jan.kratochvil@redhat.com>,
> 	"gdb-patches@sourceware.org" <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
> Date: Fri, 1 Mar 2013 14:45:35 +0000
> 
> > > 1  void foo (void)
> > > 2 {
> > > 3    ...
> > > 4    bar ();
> > > 5    ...
> > > 6  }
> > >
> > > When we record the execution of foo, there will be instructions for the
> > > first ..., then instructions for bar, and then instructions for the second ....
> > >
> > > The "record function-call-history" will print:
> > >   foo.c:1-4	foo (void)
> > >   bar.c:8-12	bar (void)
> > >   foo.c:5-6	foo (void
> > 
> > This indicates that "record function-execution-history" might be a
> > better name.  But in any case, weren't 'bar' and 'foo' called in this
> > example?
> 
> Yes, they were called.
> 
> What I have problems with is that foo was called once but we print
> two lines for foo, one for instructions before the call to bar and one
> for instructions after the return from bar.
> 
> Wouldn't "called" suggest that there be only one line for foo in the
> above example?

Perhaps we should change our aspect angle and use this:

  "record function-call-history" prints the execution history at
  function granularity.

> In the documentation, there had been a @kindex show record memory-query.
> I changed it to @kindex show record full memory-query.

OK, but there should be only one entry that begins with "@kindex show
record full".