Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 17 Jan 2007 11:05:35 -0500
From:      John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org>
To:        Xin LI <delphij@freebsd.org>
Cc:        cvs-src@freebsd.org, src-committers@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:  <200701171105.36393.jhb@freebsd.org>
In-Reply-To: <200701171505.l0HF5qGd068469@repoman.freebsd.org>
References:  <200701171505.l0HF5qGd068469@repoman.freebsd.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
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.

-- 
John Baldwin



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200701171105.36393.jhb>