Philip Guenther wrote: > On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 1:30 AM, Mathieu - <naa...@poolp.org> wrote: > > Ted Unangst wrote: > >> Mathieu - wrote: > >> > Hello list, > >> > > >> > I'm introducing hashfree, a counterpart to hashinit in order to pass the > >> > size to free(9) while hiding the implementation details. > >> > Most of the api users are converted in the patch below, those not > >> > included just simply do not free the memory (pid hash table etc). All, > >> > except for one case, the input hashtbl in in_pcb, because at free time > >> > the size is really not known, so it needs more moving of things around > >> > and is out the scope of this patch. > >> > > >> > Manpage diff courtesy of natano@ on an old version of the diff! > >> > >> looks good > > > > Anyone ? > > I don't understand the rename to hashfree() from the NetBSD name of > hashdone(). Yes, it has different args...but so does our hashinit()!
It's plain and simple ignorance on my side. I usually crosscheck with the other BSD but in this case I didn't, and came up with this name on my own. Obviously "xxfree" was the best thing I could come up with considering that I was tracking the sizes given to free(9). I don't have a strong opinion on this one though and can generate another diff with "hashdone" instead. > > <shurg> > > tedu, were you going to commit this? > > > Philip Guenther >
