From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S263883AbTLORYP (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 Dec 2003 12:24:15 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S263885AbTLORYP (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 Dec 2003 12:24:15 -0500 Received: from fmr99.intel.com ([192.55.52.32]:55211 "EHLO hermes-pilot.fm.intel.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S263883AbTLORYM (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 Dec 2003 12:24:12 -0500 Message-ID: <3FDDEE32.7050900@intel.com> Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2003 19:24:02 +0200 From: Vladimir Kondratiev User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.6b) Gecko/20031210 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en, ru MIME-Version: 1.0 To: root@chaos.analogic.com CC: "Kevin P. Fleming" , Mark Hahn , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Martin Mares Subject: Re: PCI Express support for 2.4 kernel References: <3FDDD8C6.3080804@intel.com> <3FDDDC68.80209@backtobasicsmgmt.com> <3FDDE39E.1050300@intel.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Richard B. Johnson wrote: Let's stop this discussion, it leads to nowhere. Probable, yes, initializer do add bytes to the data segment. But it does not make difference for memory image after loading, do it? Does this difference in executable size worth potential risk of error? Anyway, common style in kernel seems to be to do initialize static vars, even to 0. There are plenty of examples, including the same file, (for 2.4.23) arch/i386/kernel/pci-pc.c:32 static int pci_using_acpi_prt = 0; or arch/i386/kernel/setup.c:1241 static int tsc_disable __initdata = 0; Finally, let's stop this thread. Let it be up to person who will be (if it will happen) checking this code into kernel, to decide on coding style. I, personally, value code clarity more then 4 bytes in executable size. But I will not object if more experienced kernel maintainers have another priority. Vladimir.