In some email I received from Alfred Perlstein, sie wrote:
> * Darren Reed <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [010416 13:37] wrote:
> > 
> > What do people think about having a range of bits in oid_kind that are
> > not used by FreeBSD but are only to be used by ``private'' sysctl handlers?
> > 
> > e.g.
> > 
> > #define     CTLFLAG_PRIVATE 0x000ffff0
> > 
> > Do I need elaborate any further ?
> 
> I think a half-paragraph explaining what this does would help. :)
> 
> I'm assuming this allows someone to have thier own private numbered
> mib in the sysctl tree, my question is why are you using hardcoded
> numbers rather than names?

Uh, no.

The idea is so you can do this:

#define SYSCTL_IPF(parent, nbr, name, access, ptr, val, descr) \
        SYSCTL_OID(parent, nbr, name, CTLTYPE_INT|access, \
                   ptr, val, sysctl_ipf_int, "I", descr);
SYSCTL_IPF(_net_inet_ipf, OID_AUTO, fr_tcpidletimeout, CTLFLAG_RW|CTL_PRIV,
           &fr_tcpidletimeout, 0, "");

and have CTL_PRIV be a bit which sysctl_ipf_int understands and not
have to worry about the value of CTL_PRIV ever being afflicted with
double-use by a FreeBSD flag because CTL_PRIV is part of CTLFLAG_PRIVATE.

Darren

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message

Reply via email to