Re: [KJ] A question about uninitializing static variables

[Tom Bradley <tojabr@gmail.com>]

the default for gcc is `-fzero-initialized-in-bss', the kernel
makefile does not change this therefore bss is zeroed, this is
documented in the gcc manpage.

Tom



On Tue, 29 Mar 2005 16:31:21 +0200 (CEST), Carlo Perassi <carlo@linux.it> wrote:
> Hi.
> One of the tasks at http://janitor.kernelnewbies.org/TODO
> is described as
> 
> "
> uninitialize static variables initialized to 0, to make it go to the
> .bss, instead of .data.
> "
> 
> I made two patches for two maintainers which uninitialize some static
> int used as module parameters and actually initialized to 0.
> 
> One maintainer do not have problems with the patches but the maintainer
> of the file the second patch refers to would like to have some kind of
> "proof" that "it is still guaranteed that those variables will be
> initialized to 0". I wrote him something like "this simple hello module
> shows it is still guaranteed..." but it's not enough for him. I guess
> he'd like a more formal explanation of the following statement:
> 
> An uninitialized static variable of {the kernel, a kernel module} will
> be compiled to go to the .bss and it is guaranteed that will be
> "zero-ed" there.
> 
> Is there someone with a link or something I could send to this
> maintainer to show him the reasons why the previous statement is true?
> Maybe it could be useful to put this reference in the TODO itself.
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> --
> Carlo Perassi - http://www.linux.it/~carlo/
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Kernel-janitors mailing list
> Kernel-janitors@lists.osdl.org
> http://lists.osdl.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel-janitors
>
_______________________________________________
Kernel-janitors mailing list
Kernel-janitors@lists.osdl.org
http://lists.osdl.org/mailman/listinfo/kernel-janitors