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 PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 8 Oct 2014 11:46:20 +0200 From: Michal Kubecek <mkubecek@...e.cz> To: David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM> Cc: 'Hannes Frederic Sowa' <hannes@...essinduktion.org>, Fabian Frederick <fabf@...net.be>, Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1 net-next] af_unix: remove NULL assignment on static On Wed, Oct 08, 2014 at 09:10:23AM +0000, David Laight wrote: > From: Hannes Frederic Sowa > > I think David's concern was whether if 0 == false in all situations. It > > is pretty clear that static memory is initialized to 0. > > I'm not 100% sure about that. > static pointers may be required to be initialised to NULL. ISO C 99 says: If an object that has static storage duration is not initialized explicitly, then: - if it has pointer type, it is initialized to a null pointer; - if it has arithmetic type, it is initialized to (positive or unsigned) zero; - if it is an aggregate, every member is initialized (recursively) according to these rules; - if it is a union, the first named member is initialized (recursively) according to these rules. Michal Kubeček -- 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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists