Re: vm_page_t related KBI [Was: Re: panic at vm_page_wire with FreeBSD 9.0 Beta 3]

On Tue, Nov 15, 2011 at 10:15 AM, Attilio Rao <attilio_at_freebsd.org> wrote:
> 2011/11/7 Kostik Belousov <kostikbel_at_gmail.com>:
>> On Mon, Nov 07, 2011 at 11:45:38AM -0600, Alan Cox wrote:
>>> Ok.  I'll offer one final suggestion.  Please consider an alternative
>>> suffix to "func".  Perhaps, "kbi" or "KBI".  In other words, something
>>> that hints at the function's reason for existing.
>>
>> Sure. Below is the extraction of only vm_page_lock() bits, together
>> with the suggested rename. When Attilio provides the promised simplification
>> of the mutex KPI, this can be reduced.
>
> My tentative patch is here:
> http://www.freebsd.org/~attilio/mutexfileline.patch
>
> I need to make more compile testing later, but it already compiles
> GENERIC + modules fine on HEAD.
>
> The patch provides a common entrypoint, option independent, for both
> fast case and debug/compat case.
> Additively, it almost entirely fixes the standard violation of the
> reserved namespace, as you described (the notable exception being the
> macro used in the fast path, that I want to fix as well, but in a
> separate commit).
>
> Now the file/line couplet can be passed to the "_" suffix variant of
> the flag functions.
>
> eadler_at_ reviewed the mutex.h comment.
>
> Please let me know what you think about it, as long as we agree on the
> patch I'll commit it.

Out of curiosity, why are function names explicitly spelled out in
panic and log messages, instead of using %s and __func__?  I've seen
this all around FreeBSD, and if there's no reason otherwise, I'd just
as soon change to a version that doesn't need updating when the
function names change.

Thanks,
matthew