From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 25469 invoked by alias); 13 Mar 2013 19:26:47 -0000 Received: (qmail 25457 invoked by uid 22791); 13 Mar 2013 19:26:44 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-7.6 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,KHOP_RCVD_UNTRUST,KHOP_SPAMHAUS_DROP,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RCVD_IN_HOSTKARMA_W,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,SPF_HELO_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 13 Mar 2013 19:26:37 +0000 Received: from int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.23]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r2DJQZxp010606 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 13 Mar 2013 15:26:35 -0400 Received: from barimba (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by int-mx10.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r2DJQXoE002542 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Wed, 13 Mar 2013 15:26:34 -0400 From: Tom Tromey To: Yao Qi Cc: Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 01/15] Refactor 'tsave' References: <1362800844-27940-1-git-send-email-yao@codesourcery.com> <1362800844-27940-2-git-send-email-yao@codesourcery.com> <87obeofp2y.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> <51405595.9050003@codesourcery.com> Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2013 19:26:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <51405595.9050003@codesourcery.com> (Yao Qi's message of "Wed, 13 Mar 2013 18:31:49 +0800") Message-ID: <87a9q7ayom.fsf@fleche.redhat.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2013-03/txt/msg00603.txt.bz2 >>>>> "Yao" == Yao Qi writes: Tom> So, I think it would be better to have an explicit "dtor" method that is Tom> called to clean up. Yao> I Agree. A new field is added in 'struct trace_file_write_ops', Yao> which is responsible for release file descriptor and memory. The Yao> will be called in trace_file_writer_xfree. Thanks. Tom> It is strange to see multiple virtual calls in a row like this. Tom> Is there some reason not to collapse them into a single call? Yao> It is useful to reduce the complexity of each hook function of 'struct Yao> trace_file_write_ops'. Each function will be small and clear. Nothing constrains the implementation to be one huge function. But, that said, this is fine as is. Yao> +static void Yao> +tfile_dtor (struct trace_file_writer *self) Yao> +{ Yao> + struct tfile_trace_file_writer *writer Yao> + = (struct tfile_trace_file_writer *) self; Yao> + Yao> + xfree (writer->pathname); Yao> + fclose (writer->fp); I think this needs a NULL check. Otherwise I think on error this may crash. Ok with that fixed. Tom