From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <v.shpilevoy@tarantool.org>
Received: from smtpng3.m.smailru.net (smtpng3.m.smailru.net [94.100.177.149])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256
 bits)) (No client certificate requested)
 by dev.tarantool.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E58D745C308
 for <tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org>;
 Sat,  5 Dec 2020 21:30:29 +0300 (MSK)
References: <20201204153003.175555-1-gorcunov@gmail.com>
 <20201204153003.175555-2-gorcunov@gmail.com>
From: Vladislav Shpilevoy <v.shpilevoy@tarantool.org>
Message-ID: <6ba34f0c-8ce5-75ae-2dd7-19e22432e744@tarantool.org>
Date: Sat, 5 Dec 2020 19:30:28 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20201204153003.175555-2-gorcunov@gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH v3 1/4] backtrace: allow to specify
 destination buffer
List-Id: Tarantool development patches <tarantool-patches.dev.tarantool.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.tarantool.org/mailman/options/tarantool-patches>, 
 <mailto:tarantool-patches-request@dev.tarantool.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.tarantool.org/pipermail/tarantool-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tarantool-patches-request@dev.tarantool.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.tarantool.org/mailman/listinfo/tarantool-patches>, 
 <mailto:tarantool-patches-request@dev.tarantool.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@gmail.com>, tml <tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org>
Cc: Mons Anderson <v.perepelitsa@corp.mail.ru>

Thanks for the patch!

On 04.12.2020 16:30, Cyrill Gorcunov via Tarantool-patches wrote:
> This will allow to reuse this routine in crash
> reports.
> 
> Part-of #5261
> 
> Signed-off-by: Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@gmail.com>
> ---
>  src/lib/core/backtrace.cc | 12 ++++++------
>  src/lib/core/backtrace.h  |  3 +++
>  2 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/src/lib/core/backtrace.cc b/src/lib/core/backtrace.cc
> index 456ce9a4d..68d0d3ee6 100644
> --- a/src/lib/core/backtrace.cc
> +++ b/src/lib/core/backtrace.cc
> @@ -131,7 +131,7 @@ get_proc_name(unw_cursor_t *unw_cur, unw_word_t *offset, bool skip_cache)
>  }
>  
>  char *
> -backtrace(void)
> +backtrace(char *start, char *end)

Why so strange choice of arguments? We almost always use char* + size_t,
except for a few cases such as code working with tuples, where we 'save'
time on not calculating 'end' in each next stack frame. Lets be consistent
and use char* + size_t, not to raise unnecessary questions for such simple
code.