netdev - Re: [PATCH 1/1 net-next] af_unix: remove NULL assignment on static

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 7 Oct 2014 23:05:05 +0200 (CEST)
From:	Fabian Frederick <fabf@...net.be>
To:	Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@...essinduktion.org>
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1 net-next] af_unix: remove NULL assignment on static



> On 07 October 2014 at 22:54 Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@...essinduktion.org>
> wrote:
>
>
> On Di, 2014-10-07 at 22:49 +0200, Fabian Frederick wrote:
> >
> > > On 07 October 2014 at 22:33 Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, Oct 07, 2014 at 04:18:32PM -0400, David Miller wrote:
> > > > From: Fabian Frederick <fabf@...net.be>
> > > > Date: Tue,  7 Oct 2014 22:16:36 +0200
> > > >
> > > > > static values are automatically initialized to NULL
> > > > >
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Fabian Frederick <fabf@...net.be>
> > > >
> > > > Isn't there some implementation room given to compilers
> > > > as to the representation of true and false?
> > >
> > > Not for true/false.
> > >
> > > C99 standard, section 7.16:
> > >
> > > ...
> > > The remaining three macros are suitable for use in #if preprocessing
> > > directives. They are
> > >
> > > true
> > >
> > > which expands to the integer constant 1,
> > >
> > > false
> > >
> > > which expands to the integer constant 0, and
> > > ...
> > >
> > > No idea where the NULL comes into the picture, though.
> > >
> > > Guenter
> >
> > Maybe comment should have been "static values are automatically initialized
> > to
> > 0" then ?
>
> I think David's concern was whether if 0 == false in all situations. It
> is pretty clear that static memory is initialized to 0.
>
> Thanks,
> Hannes

Of course :) It was an answer to Guenter's explanation.

Regards,
Fabian
>
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html