[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <33302790-0a4c-e2b3-868d-3e7dadbd3c07@mellanox.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2016 09:47:31 +0300
From: Haggai Eran <haggaie@...lanox.com>
To: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, Doug Ledford <dledford@...hat.com>
CC: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
<linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Sean Hefty <sean.hefty@...el.com>,
"Hal Rosenstock" <hal.rosenstock@...il.com>,
Matan Barak <matanb@...lanox.com>,
Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>,
Sagi Grimberg <sagi@...mberg.me>,
"Bart Van Assche" <bart.vanassche@...disk.com>,
Alex Vesker <valex@...lanox.com>,
Guy Shapiro <guysh@...lanox.com>, <linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/28] [v2] infiniband: shut up a maybe-uninitialized
warning
On 10/18/2016 1:05 AM, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> @@ -1309,7 +1311,7 @@ static bool validate_net_dev(struct net_device *net_dev,
> static struct net_device *cma_get_net_dev(struct ib_cm_event *ib_event,
> const struct cma_req_info *req)
> {
> - struct sockaddr_storage listen_addr_storage, src_addr_storage;
> + struct sockaddr_storage listen_addr_storage = {}, src_addr_storage = {};
Doesn't this still translate to an extra initialization that Doug was
worried about?
Haggai
Powered by blists - more mailing lists