tree da1ecf272317cc684ee64062bbe25153630e6f24
parent 1a5b5a7aff28a5c8bdafc6104508f553f50977a4
author Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@redhat.com> 1314227623 +0200
committer Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@redhat.com> 1314227623 +0200

Opotimize "scno >= 0 && scno < nsyscalls" check

gcc can't figure out on its own that this check can be done with
single compare, and does two compares. We can help it by casting
scno to unsigned long: ((unsigned long)(scno) < nsyscalls)

* defs.h: New macro SCNO_IN_RANGE(long_var).
* count.c (count_syscall): Use SCNO_IN_RANGE() instead of open-coded check.
* syscall.c (getrval2): Use SCNO_IN_RANGE() instead of open-coded check.
This fixes a bug: missing check for scno < 0 and scno > nsyscalls
instead of scno >= nsyscalls.
(get_scno): Use SCNO_IN_RANGE() instead of open-coded check.
This fixes a bug: scno > nsyscalls instead of scno >= nsyscalls.
(known_scno): Use SCNO_IN_RANGE() instead of open-coded check.
(internal_syscall): Likewise.
(syscall_enter): Likewise.
(trace_syscall_entering): Likewise.
(get_error): Likewise.
(trace_syscall_exiting): Likewise.

Signed-off-by: Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@redhat.com>