svn commit: r244154 - head/bin/ps

[Alfred Perlstein]

On 12/13/12 8:30 PM, Eitan Adler wrote:
> On 13 December 2012 13:16, Konstantin Belousov <kostikbel at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 05:55:41PM +0100, Pawel Jakub Dawidek wrote:
>>> On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 06:12:42PM +0200, Konstantin Belousov wrote:
>>>> On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 12:12:44PM +0100, Pawel Jakub Dawidek wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 11:06:52PM +0200, Konstantin Belousov wrote:
>>>>> I saw CTLFLAG_TUN on the sysctl and assumed it is read-only...
>>>>> How about defining BSD_PID_MAX in sys/proc.h, which would be visible by
>>>>> userland as well and setting PID_MAX to BSD_PID_MAX?
>>>>>
>>>>> This would also help bsnmpd.
>>>>>
>>>>>    http://people.freebsd.org/~pjd/patches/PID_MAX.patch
>>>> Do you know why PID_MAX is under _KERNEL ? If there is no real reason,
>>>> it would be better to move it outside kernel-only section. sys/proc.h
>>>> is not in POSIX anyway.
>>> I assumed it will break some ports that may define it themselves.
>>> I wonder if we could do a test ports build to see what's the impact.
>> Sure.
>>
>> On the other hand, sys/proc.h is mostly useless for the application code
>> as it is now. Might be, use
>> #ifndef PID_MAX
>> braces ?
> I think it makes more sense to unconditionally define it.  A file
> including sys/proc.h almost certainly wants the real PID_MAX.  It
> would be better to cause a pre-process time failure than to have it
> silently hide the problem.
>
>
>
I'm thinking it's much better to make it a sysctl readonly 
(kern.pidmax), not a compile time thing.  think about page_size and 
other things that can change.  by making it dynamic you force better 
programming style at the slight expense of a few cycles of compile time 
optimization.

-Alfred