Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2007 11:15:09 -0800 From: Julian Elischer <julian@elischer.org> To: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> Cc: cvs-src@freebsd.org, src-committers@freebsd.org, Xin LI <delphij@freebsd.org>, cvs-all@freebsd.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/ddb db_command.c db_thread.c src/sys/vm vm_object.c vm_pageout.c src/sys/i386/i386 pmap.c src/sys/i386/ibcs2 ibcs2_sysvec.c Message-ID: <45AE75BD.8060703@elischer.org> In-Reply-To: <200701171105.36393.jhb@freebsd.org> References: <200701171505.l0HF5qGd068469@repoman.freebsd.org> <200701171105.36393.jhb@freebsd.org>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
John Baldwin wrote: > On Wednesday 17 January 2007 10:05, Xin LI wrote: >> delphij 2007-01-17 15:05:52 UTC >> >> FreeBSD src repository >> >> Modified files: >> sys/ddb db_command.c db_thread.c >> sys/vm vm_object.c vm_pageout.c >> sys/i386/i386 pmap.c >> sys/i386/ibcs2 ibcs2_sysvec.c >> Log: >> Use FOREACH_PROC_IN_SYSTEM instead of using its unrolled form. > > I actually think this macro is actually not that useful and I'd rather > we get rid of it. :) For one thing zombies are still processes and this > doesn't cover those, so the name is a bit misleading. However, this is a > minor thing, and I can see that the kernel should be consistent one way or > another. I'd just vote for being consistent by removing FOREACH_PROC and > FOREACH_THREAD. The kernel doesn't use wrappers for other lists, it just > uses LIST_FOREACH and TAILQ_FOREACH directly. > I personally prefer to use them and one reason to do so is to allow the macros to be changed to check locking etc.home | help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?45AE75BD.8060703>