Re: [PATCH] moduleparam: Resolve missing-field-initializer warning

[Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>]

Jeff Kirsher <jeffrey.t.kirsher@intel.com> writes:
> From: Mark Rustad <mark.d.rustad@intel.com>
>
> Resolve a missing-field-initializer warning, that is produced
> by every reference to module_param_call, by using designated
> initialization for the first field. That is enough to silence
> the complaint.
>
> Signed-off-by: Mark Rustad <mark.d.rustad@intel.com>
> Signed-off-by: Jeff Kirsher <jeffrey.t.kirsher@intel.com>
> ---
>  include/linux/moduleparam.h | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

Strange, I haven't seen this warning.  Compiler version?  And it's good
to quote the error message, so people can google it.

Cheers,
Rusty.

> diff --git a/include/linux/moduleparam.h b/include/linux/moduleparam.h
> index 494f99e..d99a9e9 100644
> --- a/include/linux/moduleparam.h
> +++ b/include/linux/moduleparam.h
> @@ -196,7 +196,7 @@ struct kparam_array
>  /* Obsolete - use module_param_cb() */
>  #define module_param_call(name, set, get, arg, perm)			\
>  	static struct kernel_param_ops __param_ops_##name =		\
> -		{ 0, (void *)set, (void *)get };			\
> +		{ .flags = 0, (void *)set, (void *)get };		\
>  	__module_param_call(MODULE_PARAM_PREFIX,			\
>  			    name, &__param_ops_##name, arg,		\
>  			    (perm) + sizeof(__check_old_set_param(set))*0, -1)
> -- 
> 1.9.3