create a new code block and thus must be balanced at the same lexical
scope. (This is also a requirement in POSIX.)
PR: 194280
Submitted by: dr2867.business@pacbell.net
MFC after: 1 week
- Create a separate 'return values' section and move some statements about
return values to that section.
- Note that each invocation of va_start() and va_copy() must be paired with
va_end() in the same function.
MFC after: 1 week
These are largely syntactic sugar. However, they improve code
readability where an RB_FOREACH() or RB_FOREACH_REVERSE()
traversal has been interrupted and must be resumed. Performance
is improved by avoiding unnecessary traversal from the head node.
optionally start the traversal from a previously found element by passing the
element in as "var". Passing a NULL "var" retains the same semantics as the
regular FOREACH macros.
Kudos to phk for suggesting the "FROM" suffix instead of my original proposal.
Reviewed by: jhb (previous version), rpaulo
MFC after: 1 week
Regular LISTs have been implemented in such a way that the prev-pointer
does not point to the previous element, but to the next-pointer stored
in the previous element. This is done to simplify LIST_REMOVE(). This
macro can be implemented without knowing the address of the list head.
Unfortunately this makes it harder to implement LIST_PREV(), which is
why this macro was never here. Still, it is possible to implement this
macro. If the prev-pointer points to the list head, we return NULL.
Otherwise we simply subtract the offset of the prev-pointer within the
structure.
It's not as efficient as traversing forward of course, but in practice
it shouldn't be that bad. In almost all use cases, people will want to
compare the value returned by LIST_PREV() against NULL, so an optimizing
compiler will not emit code that does more branching than TAILQs.
While there, make the code a bit more readable by introducing
__member2struct(). This makes STAILQ_LAST() far more readable.
MFC after: 1 month
quotation. Also make sure we have the same amount of columns in each row as
the number of columns we specify in the head arguments.
Reviewed by: brueffer
This switches us to using -isoC-2011 as the symbol name which is used by
groff and mdocml. It follows the change to 4 digit years as done with
IEEE Std 1003 post-1999.
MFC after: 2 weeks (groff changes only)
The macro construction used now, is almost identical to the code
provided in C11 proposal N1404. This new version doesn't seem to
introduce any regressions according to the regression test in tools/,
but still seems to malfunction with Clang on certain aspects.
The new code does work successfully with GCC 4.2, 4.6 and 4.7. With 4.7,
it also works when __generic() is implemented on top of _Generic().
Discussed with: stefanf
As Garrett points out,
It is no more a debugging interface than setproctitle(3), and has not
been since the name started getting stuffed into the kernel. This
statement may have made sense when the name was only visible in thread
state dumps and the debugger.
PR: threads/158815
Submitted by: wollman@
calling thread's unique integral ID, which is similar to AIX function of
the same name. Bump __FreeBSD_version to note its introduction.
Reviewed by: kib
