Re: [PATCH] Removed compilation warnings from mountd/cache.c

["J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>]

On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 03:18:11PM -0400, Jim Rees wrote:
> J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> 
>   On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 11:50:14AM -0400, Steve Dickson wrote:
>   > Commit 5604b35a6 introduced a number of missing initializer
>   > warnings that were missed. This patch removes those warnings.
>   > 
>   > Signed-off-by: Steve Dickson <steved@redhat.com>
>   > ---
>   >  utils/mountd/cache.c |    6 ++++--
>   >  1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>   > 
>   > diff --git a/utils/mountd/cache.c b/utils/mountd/cache.c
>   > index df6b38f..86a2790 100644
>   > --- a/utils/mountd/cache.c
>   > +++ b/utils/mountd/cache.c
>   > @@ -825,7 +825,6 @@ struct {
>   >  	char *cache_name;
>   >  	void (*cache_handle)(FILE *f);
>   >  	FILE *f;
>   > -	char vbuf[RPC_CHAN_BUF_SIZE];
>   >  } cachelist[] = {
>   >  	{ "auth.unix.ip", auth_unix_ip, NULL},
>   >  	{ "auth.unix.gid", auth_unix_gid, NULL},
>   > @@ -833,6 +832,9 @@ struct {
>   >  	{ "nfsd.fh", nfsd_fh, NULL},
>   >  	{ NULL, NULL, NULL }
>   >  };
>   > +struct vbs {
>   > +	char vbuf[RPC_CHAN_BUF_SIZE];
>   > +} vbufs [(sizeof(cachelist)/sizeof(cachelist[0])) - 1];
>   
>   Weird--why does that make a difference?  It's statically initialized
>   memory either way, isn't it?
> 
> The problem is the vbuf item was added to the struct but no initializer was
> given for it.  It could also have been fixed by supplying the missing
> initializer:
> 
> 	{ "auth.unix.ip", auth_unix_ip, NULL, ""}, ...

Oh, OK.  Then could we do that, Steve, instead of moving the buffer
to a separate structure?

--b.