From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=52866 helo=eggs.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Oq7ey-0002SY-Bg
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 30 Aug 2010 12:56:41 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69)
	(envelope-from <av1474@comtv.ru>) id 1Oq7ex-0001oz-7X
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 30 Aug 2010 12:56:40 -0400
Received: from fe02x03-cgp.akado.ru ([77.232.31.165]:65369 helo=akado.ru)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69)
	(envelope-from <av1474@comtv.ru>) id 1Oq7ew-0001o0-SG
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 30 Aug 2010 12:56:39 -0400
Date: Mon, 30 Aug 2010 20:56:09 +0400 (MSD)
From: malc <av1474@comtv.ru>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH 04/14] Zero initialize timespec struct
	explicitly
In-Reply-To: <4C7BD19E.1050604@codemonkey.ws>
Message-ID: <alpine.LNX.2.00.1008302043360.1463@linmac>
References: <1283182547-26116-1-git-send-email-Jes.Sorensen@redhat.com>
	<1283182547-26116-5-git-send-email-Jes.Sorensen@redhat.com>
	<4C7BD19E.1050604@codemonkey.ws>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/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: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>
Cc: kwolf@redhat.com, Jes.Sorensen@redhat.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org

On Mon, 30 Aug 2010, Anthony Liguori wrote:

> On 08/30/2010 10:35 AM, Jes.Sorensen@redhat.com wrote:
> > From: Jes Sorensen<Jes.Sorensen@redhat.com>
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Jes Sorensen<Jes.Sorensen@redhat.com>
> > ---
> >   linux-aio.c |    2 +-
> >   1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/linux-aio.c b/linux-aio.c
> > index 68f4b3d..3240996 100644
> > --- a/linux-aio.c
> > +++ b/linux-aio.c
> > @@ -118,7 +118,7 @@ static void qemu_laio_completion_cb(void *opaque)
> >           struct io_event events[MAX_EVENTS];
> >           uint64_t val;
> >           ssize_t ret;
> > -        struct timespec ts = { 0 };
> > +        struct timespec ts = { 0, 0 };
> >    
> 
> I don't like these.  What's wrong with { } or { 0 }?  Implicit zeroing of
> members is a critical feature of structure initialization so if there is
> something wrong with this, it's important to know why because otherwise we've
> got a massive amount of broken code.
> 

Apart from gcc complaining about fields not being initialized explicitly
there's nothing wrong with it.

-- 
mailto:av1474@comtv.ru