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>