Re: [PATCH] libxtables: Dont initialize global xt_params

[Philip Craig <philipc@snapgear.com>]

Thomas Jarosch wrote:
> Well, I guess that's a job for the compiler/optimizer. I did a quick test by 
> writing two versions of a small program initializing a static variable with 
> zero and one version that doesn't (=zeroed in .bss). Guess what,
> the size of the resulting executable stays the same.
> 
> When I initialize the variable with a non-zero value, then the program size 
> increases. I tested "-O2", "-O0" and "-Os" and the results where the same.
> Feel free to look at the assembler output, though I guess this optimization
> is not measurable and makes the code harder to read :o)

For gcc, this depends on the -fno-zero-initialized-in-bss option.
Recommendations to avoid zero initialization generally come from
a time when gcc didn't do this by default.  Now it is more just
personal preference.