Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Tue, 17 Oct 2006 01:37:18 +0400
From:      Gleb Smirnoff <glebius@FreeBSD.org>
To:        Paolo Pisati <piso@FreeBSD.org>
Cc:        Perforce Change Reviews <perforce@FreeBSD.org>
Subject:   Re: PERFORCE change 108000 for review
Message-ID:  <20061016213718.GS59833@FreeBSD.org>
In-Reply-To: <200610162129.k9GLTTAF086207@repoman.freebsd.org>
References:  <200610162129.k9GLTTAF086207@repoman.freebsd.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, Oct 16, 2006 at 09:29:29PM +0000, Paolo Pisati wrote:
P> Change 108000 by piso@piso_newluxor on 2006/10/16 21:28:34
P> 
P> 	Move nat locking from private nat_chain_rwl to layer3_chain rwl.
P> +#define	NAT_WLOCK_ASSERT(_chain) IPFW_WLOCK_ASSERT(_chain)
P> +#define NAT_RLOCK(p) IPFW_RLOCK(p)
P> +#define NAT_RUNLOCK(p) IPFW_RUNLOCK(p)
P> +#define NAT_WLOCK(p) IPFW_WLOCK(p)
P> +#define NAT_WUNLOCK(p) IPFW_WUNLOCK(p)

It is an obfuscation of the code. Why do we need to have two words
doing the same instead of one?

-- 
Totus tuus, Glebius.
GLEBIUS-RIPN GLEB-RIPE



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20061016213718.GS59833>