On 2004.06.26 12:04:05 +0000, matthew green wrote:
> 
> is this necessary?  can't we just define it as being 0 or non-zero
> and not have to have the extra code of this function? 
> 
> (it seems there are a lot of these "tiny" functions to check sysctl..
> i wonder if a generic method for min/max bounds checking could be
> implemented in the sysctl framework itself?  it seems there'd be
> dozens or even hundreds of functions that could be removed ...)
> 
Yes, it's true. There are some sysctl functions that just check for ranges 
of given values. Currently, I'm not aware of a way to make
sysctl_createv() check automagicly for ranges.

>    > /*
>    1897a1929,1939
>    >                 /*
>    > 	 	 * If kern.showallprocs == 0, then skip processes that don't 
>    > 		 * match the UID of the calling process. Root is allowed to 
>    > 		 * see every process.
>    > 		 */
>    > 		if (!showallprocs)
>    > 			if (l->l_proc->p_ucred->cr_uid) 
>    > 				if (p->p_ucred->cr_uid != 
>    > 					l->l_proc->p_ucred->cr_uid)
>    > 						continue;
> 
> any reason this isn't written as:
> 	continue;
> 	if (!showallprocs && l->l_proc->p_ucred->cr_uid &&
> 	    p->p_ucred->cr_uid != l->l_proc->p_ucred->cr_uid)
> 		continue;
No, no reason at all :)
I think it's better the way you wrote it.

Thanks,
    Rui Paulo
 

-- 
  "Simplicity is the ultimate 
    sophistication." 
    -- Leonardo da Vinci