Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] [func_call] Add function-call-history command to MI.

[Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>]

> Date: Wed,  6 Jul 2022 15:36:39 +0200
> From: Ari Hannula via Gdb-patches <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
> Cc: Tim Wiederhake <tim.wiederhake@intel.com>
> 
> From: Tim Wiederhake <tim.wiederhake@intel.com>
> 
> This allows MI clients like Eclipse to retrieve the function call history.
> 
> Changes the output of the command.  Previously it returned a tuple of
> tuples, and now returns a list of tuples.
> 
> MI response was fixed to follow MI syntax, e.g.
> 
> "insn history" or "func history" -> "call-history"
> "insn begin" -> "insn-begin"
> "insn end" -> "insn-end"
> "min line" -> "min-line"
> "max line" -> "max-line"
> 
> Adds documentation for the command.
> 
> Adds tests for the command.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Tim Wiederhake <tim.wiederhake@intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: Ari Hannula <ari.hannula@intel.com>
> ---
>  gdb/doc/gdb.texinfo                           | 98 +++++++++++++++++++
>  gdb/mi/mi-cmd-record.c                        | 53 +++++++++-
>  gdb/mi/mi-cmd-record.h                        |  5 +
>  gdb/mi/mi-cmds.c                              |  1 +
>  gdb/mi/mi-cmds.h                              |  1 +
>  gdb/record-btrace.c                           | 22 +++--
>  gdb/record.c                                  | 28 +++---
>  gdb/record.h                                  | 18 ++++
>  .../gdb.mi/mi-function_call_history.exp       | 95 ++++++++++++++++++
>  9 files changed, 298 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-)

Thanks.

> +@table @samp
> +@item index
> +The function number in control-flow order.

Will the reader understand the meaning of "control-flow order"?  If
not, perhaps we should explain what that means.

> +@item level
> +The function level in a back trace across the entire branch trace.
                           ^^^^^^^^^^
"backtrace", as one word.

> +@item file
> +Source file path and name.
               ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
GNU conventions frown on using "path" for anything but PATH-style
directory lists.  Please use "filename" instead.

> +@item insn-begin
> +Instruction number range begin.

That's awkward English.  Suggest to rephrase:

  Beginning of the range of instruction numbers.

> +@item insn-end
> +Instruction number range end.
> +
> +@item min-line
> +Source line range begin.
> +
> +@item max-line
> +Source line range end.

Similarly here.

> +(gdb)

I believe we use @value{GDBP} instead of the literal "gdb" here.
Please see elsewhere in the manual how we do that.

The documentation part is OK with these nits fixed.