Date: Fri, 01 Oct 2010 17:11:20 +0300 From: Andriy Gapon <avg@freebsd.org> To: mdf@freebsd.org Cc: svn-src-head@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, src-committers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r213322 - head/sys/kern Message-ID: <4CA5EC08.8070502@freebsd.org> In-Reply-To: <AANLkTi=KaKVDx9bTXZwAXWpAeQ6vNpTYFiXn8Xht2Fd-@mail.gmail.com> References: <201010010934.o919YfCB097349@svn.freebsd.org> <AANLkTi=KaKVDx9bTXZwAXWpAeQ6vNpTYFiXn8Xht2Fd-@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
mdf@FreeBSD.org wrote:
> I thought CTLFLAG_TUN was only used to provide a more useful error
> message when writing to a read-only sysctl? I think the CTLFLAG_TUN
> should not be here for a RW sysctl.
Yes, that's the only use for CTLFLAG_TUN _now_.
Perhaps in the future there could be other uses, such as a flag to sysctl to list
names which are also tunables. Or some other creative use.
sysctl(9) says:
CTLFLAG_TUN Also declare a system tunable with the same name to ini‐
tialize this variable.
While the above is not true or very ambiguous at the very least, I still don't see
any reason not to use the flag in this case.
--
Andriy Gapon
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4CA5EC08.8070502>