* note nothing between wrlock() and unlock() */
XFREE(MTYPE_ITEM, i);
+FAQ
+---
+
+Why is the list head not ``const`` in the list APIs?
+ The semantics that a ``const`` list head would imply are not obvious. It
+ could mean any of the following:
+
+ * the list just shouldn't be allocated/deallocated, but may be modified.
+ This doesn't actually work since the list head needs to be modified for
+ inserting or deleting items.
+
+ * the list shouldn't be modified, but items can. This may make sense for
+ iterating, but it's not exactly consistent - an item might be on more
+ than one list, does it apply to all of them? If not, which one?
+
+ * neither the list nor the items should be modified. This is consistent,
+ but hard to do without creating a ``const`` copy of every single list
+ function. Ease of use trumps this.
+
+Why is there no "is this item on a/the list" test?
+ It's slow for several of the data structures, and the work of adding it
+ just hasn't been done. It can certainly be added if it's needed.
+
+Why is it ``PREDECL`` + ``DECLARE`` instead of ``DECLARE`` + ``DEFINE``?
+ The rule is that a ``DEFINE`` must be in a ``.c`` file, and linked exactly
+ once because it defines some kind of global symbol. This is not the case
+ for the data structure macros; they only define ``static`` symbols and it
+ is perfectly fine to include both ``PREDECL`` and ``DECLARE`` in a header
+ file. It is also perfectly fine to have the same ``DECLARE`` statement in
+ 2 ``.c`` files, but only **if the macro arguments are identical.** Maybe
+ don't do that unless you really need it.
+
FRR lists
---------