From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 454 invoked by alias); 12 Mar 2013 18:30:51 -0000 Received: (qmail 443 invoked by uid 22791); 12 Mar 2013 18:30:50 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-7.7 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; Tue, 12 Mar 2013 18:30:41 +0000 Received: from int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.22]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r2CIUbm4008076 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 12 Mar 2013 14:30:38 -0400 Received: from barimba (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by int-mx09.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r2CIUTkr022190 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Tue, 12 Mar 2013 14:30:31 -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> Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2013 18:30:00 -0000 In-Reply-To: <1362800844-27940-2-git-send-email-yao@codesourcery.com> (Yao Qi's message of "Sat, 9 Mar 2013 11:47:10 +0800") Message-ID: <87obeofp2y.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/msg00538.txt.bz2 >>>>> "Yao" == Yao Qi writes: Yao> +struct tfile_trace_file_writer Yao> { [...] Yao> + struct cleanup *cleanup; Yao> +}; This makes it seem as though the writer has a cleanup chain separate from the global chain. But, this isn't the case. This says to me that this field is a trap waiting to be sprung, say by some future code rearrangement not taking this into account. So, I think it would be better to have an explicit "dtor" method that is called to clean up. Yao> + writer->ops->start (writer, filename); Yao> + Yao> + writer->ops->write_header (writer); Yao> + Yao> + /* Write descriptive info. */ Yao> + Yao> + /* Write out the size of a register block. */ Yao> + writer->ops->write_regblock_type (writer, trace_regblock_size); Yao> + Yao> + /* Write out status of the tracing run (aka "tstatus" info). */ Yao> + writer->ops->write_status (writer, ts); It is strange to see multiple virtual calls in a row like this. Is there some reason not to collapse them into a single call? Tom