From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:38890)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <paolo.bonzini@gmail.com>) id 1S7W62-0000To-0f
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 13 Mar 2012 14:05:37 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <paolo.bonzini@gmail.com>) id 1S7W5x-0007kb-9W
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 13 Mar 2012 14:05:17 -0400
Received: from mail-ey0-f173.google.com ([209.85.215.173]:54020)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <paolo.bonzini@gmail.com>) id 1S7W5x-0007kP-0n
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 13 Mar 2012 14:05:13 -0400
Received: by eaaf11 with SMTP id f11so549382eaa.4
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Tue, 13 Mar 2012 11:05:11 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: Paolo Bonzini <paolo.bonzini@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4F5F8C55.7010709@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2012 19:05:09 +0100
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <1330893156-26569-1-git-send-email-afaerber@suse.de>	<1331398436-20761-1-git-send-email-afaerber@suse.de>
	<1331398436-20761-3-git-send-email-afaerber@suse.de>
	<4F5F3E07.9070706@samsung.com> <4F5F8AE3.9080302@suse.de>
In-Reply-To: <4F5F8AE3.9080302@suse.de>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH RFC v4 02/20] target-arm: Introduce QOM
	ARMCPUClass
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: =?UTF-8?B?QW5kcmVhcyBGw6RyYmVy?= <afaerber@suse.de>
Cc: Peter Maydell <peter.maydell@linaro.org>, i.mitsyanko@samsung.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Dmitry Solodkiy <d.solodkiy@samsung.com>, Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>, Paul Brook <paul@codesourcery.com>

Il 13/03/2012 18:58, Andreas Färber ha scritto:
>> > Are non-initialized members guaranteed to be zero here?
> I thought so for the C99-style struct initialization...

Yes.

> I never ran into
> crashes while testing. Do we need static to be safe?

No, I don't think so.  It would raise other questions (static seems to
imply that the lifetime needs to extend across multiple calls, one could
wonder if it is safe to reuse TypeInfos that way; with stack-allocated
storage it's more obvious).

Paolo