From owner-cvs-src@FreeBSD.ORG  Wed Oct 22 09:04:36 2003
Return-Path: <owner-cvs-src@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: cvs-src@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 51D1F16A4B3; Wed, 22 Oct 2003 09:04:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ebb.errno.com (ebb.errno.com [66.127.85.87])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 5195043F75; Wed, 22 Oct 2003 09:04:35 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from sam@errno.com)
Received: from 66.127.85.91 ([66.127.85.91])
	(authenticated bits=0)
	by ebb.errno.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) with ESMTP id h9MG4Y0x001827
	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=NO);
	Wed, 22 Oct 2003 09:04:35 -0700 (PDT)
	(envelope-from sam@errno.com)
From: Sam Leffler <sam@errno.com>
Organization: Errno Consulting
To: Hajimu UMEMOTO <ume@mahoroba.org>
Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2003 09:06:00 -0700
User-Agent: KMail/1.5.3
References: <200310221532.h9MFWusl093984@repoman.freebsd.org>
	<200310220845.31046.sam@errno.com> <yge7k2xfev6.wl%ume@mahoroba.org>
In-Reply-To: <yge7k2xfev6.wl%ume@mahoroba.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <200310220906.00993.sam@errno.com>
cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org
cc: src-committers@FreeBSD.org
cc: Hajimu UMEMOTO <ume@FreeBSD.org>
cc: cvs-all@FreeBSD.org
Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/netinet6 frag6.c
X-BeenThere: cvs-src@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: CVS commit messages for the src tree <cvs-src.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-src>,
	<mailto:cvs-src-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/cvs-src>
List-Post: <mailto:cvs-src@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:cvs-src-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-src>,
	<mailto:cvs-src-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2003 16:04:36 -0000

On Wednesday 22 October 2003 08:53 am, Hajimu UMEMOTO wrote:
> Hi,
>
> >>>>> On Wed, 22 Oct 2003 08:45:31 -0700
> >>>>> Sam Leffler <sam@errno.com> said:
>
> sam> The convention used throughout the kernel is for
>
> sam> FOO_LOCK_ASSERT()
>
> sam> to generate an assertion that the specified lock is held.  It would be
> good sam> for the IPv6 code to do likewise (you appear to be using
> FOO_LOCK_CHECK sam> instead).
>
> Yes, I know.  But, I don't want to make diffs against KAME as
> possible.  So, I didn't rename IP6Q_LOCK_CHECK to IP6Q_LOCK_ASSERT.

We got there first? :)  CHECK is not meaningful in the same way that ASSERT 
is.  It also means one cannot grep for instances of macros because of this 
difference.  I suggest that soon such differences against the KAME repository 
are going to be inconsequential and you are better to have code the conforms 
to local style and conventions than to the KAME repositoriy.

	Sam