Re: bufcache KNF

2016-04-11 Thread lists
Mon, 11 Apr 2016 15:59:53 +0200 Mike Belopuhov > On 11 April 2016 at 15:51, Mark Kettenis wrote: > > > > And prototypes with names in public headers are still an issue. > > > > Interesting point. What's a public header though? > Are files that end up in /usr/include/dev/pci/ public headers? >

Re: bufcache KNF

2016-04-11 Thread Philip Guenther
On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 11:49 AM, Miod Vallat wrote: > The point is that putting argument names in > public headers increases the risk of breaking third-party software > thanks to the preprocessor. The safe way for the implementation (us!) to do that is to use identifiers that start with an under

Re: bufcache KNF

2016-04-11 Thread Michael McConville
Miod Vallat wrote: > > >> fwiw i like names in prototypes, so i know what's going on. i know > >> style says that, but i think the advice is obsolete. > > > > The compiler doesn't check that the argument names in the prototype > > match those in the definition. The below program compiles without >

Re: bufcache KNF

2016-04-11 Thread Miod Vallat
>> fwiw i like names in prototypes, so i know what's going on. i know >> style says that, but i think the advice is obsolete. > > The compiler doesn't check that the argument names in the prototype > match those in the definition. The below program compiles without > warning. This is not the poin

Re: bufcache KNF

2016-04-11 Thread Michael McConville
Ted Unangst wrote: > Martin Pieuchot wrote: > > ok? > > > > -int chillbufs(struct > > -bufcache *cache, struct bufqueue *queue, int64_t *queuepages); > > +int chillbufs(struct bufcache *, struct bufqueue *, int64_t *); > > fwiw i like names in prototypes, so i know what's going on. i know > s

Re: bufcache KNF

2016-04-11 Thread Bob Beck
guys. i have stuff outstanding in here. find something else to bikeshed please On Monday, 11 April 2016, Ted Unangst wrote: > Mark Kettenis wrote: > > And prototypes with names in public headers are still an issue. > > I think you misspelled standard. :) > >

Re: bufcache KNF

2016-04-11 Thread Ted Unangst
Mark Kettenis wrote: > And prototypes with names in public headers are still an issue. I think you misspelled standard. :)

Re: bufcache KNF

2016-04-11 Thread Mike Belopuhov
On 11 April 2016 at 15:51, Mark Kettenis wrote: > > And prototypes with names in public headers are still an issue. > Interesting point. What's a public header though? Are files that end up in /usr/include/dev/pci/ public headers? If so, why do we install all of them indiscriminately?

Re: bufcache KNF

2016-04-11 Thread Mark Kettenis
> From: "Ted Unangst" > Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2016 09:44:26 -0400 > > Martin Pieuchot wrote: > > ok? > > > > -int chillbufs(struct > > -bufcache *cache, struct bufqueue *queue, int64_t *queuepages); > > +int chillbufs(struct bufcache *, struct bufqueue *, int64_t *); > > fwiw i like names in pr

Re: bufcache KNF

2016-04-11 Thread Ted Unangst
Martin Pieuchot wrote: > ok? > > -int chillbufs(struct > -bufcache *cache, struct bufqueue *queue, int64_t *queuepages); > +int chillbufs(struct bufcache *, struct bufqueue *, int64_t *); fwiw i like names in prototypes, so i know what's going on. i know style says that, but i think the advic

Re: bufcache KNF

2016-03-09 Thread Bob Beck
no. youre giving me random conflicts. unless you have a reason beyond turdshining now is not good time to do that On Thursday, 10 March 2016, Martin Pieuchot wrote: > ok? > > Index: vfs_bio.c > === > RCS file: /cvs/src/sys/kern/vfs_

bufcache KNF

2016-03-09 Thread Martin Pieuchot
ok? Index: vfs_bio.c === RCS file: /cvs/src/sys/kern/vfs_bio.c,v retrieving revision 1.173 diff -u -p -r1.173 vfs_bio.c --- vfs_bio.c 10 Mar 2016 03:09:45 - 1.173 +++ vfs_bio.c 10 Mar 2016 07:15:57 - @@ -1292,14 +1292