netdev - Re: [iproute PATCH v2 2/7] Use C99 style initializers everywhere

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:	Wed, 22 Jun 2016 11:41:30 +0200
From:	Jakub Sitnicki <jkbs@...hat.com>
To:	Phil Sutter <phil@....cc>
Cc:	Stephen Hemminger <shemming@...cade.com>,
	Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
	David Ahern <dsa@...ulusnetworks.com>,
	Nicolas Dichtel <nicolas.dichtel@...nd.com>,
	Julien Floret <julien.floret@...nd.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [iproute PATCH v2 2/7] Use C99 style initializers everywhere

On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 11:29 AM CEST, Phil Sutter <phil@....cc> wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 22, 2016 at 11:12:14AM +0200, Jakub Sitnicki wrote:
>> On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 06:18 PM CEST, Phil Sutter <phil@....cc> wrote:
>> > This big patch was compiled by vimgrepping for memset calls and changing
>> > to C99 initializer if applicable. One notable exception is the
>> > initialization of union bpf_attr in tc/tc_bpf.c: changing it would break
>> > for older gcc versions (at least <=3.4.6).
>> >
>> > Calls to memset for struct rtattr pointer fields for parse_rtattr*()
>> > were just dropped since they are not needed.
>> >
>> > The changes here allowed the compiler to discover some unused variables,
>> > so get rid of them, too.
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Phil Sutter <phil@....cc>
>> > ---
>> 
>> [...]
>> 
>> > diff --git a/bridge/fdb.c b/bridge/fdb.c
>> > index be849f980a802..a59d6a9c13018 100644
>> > --- a/bridge/fdb.c
>> > +++ b/bridge/fdb.c
>> > @@ -177,16 +177,15 @@ static int fdb_show(int argc, char **argv)
>> >  		struct nlmsghdr	n;
>> >  		struct ifinfomsg	ifm;
>> >  		char			buf[256];
>> > -	} req;
>> > +	} req = {
>> > +		.n.nlmsg_len = NLMSG_LENGTH(sizeof(struct ifinfomsg)),
>> > +		.ifm.ifi_family = PF_BRIDGE
>> > +	};
>> >  
>> 
>> A comma is allowed after a list of initializers (IOW, after the last
>> initializer). Having it would make for smaller/cleaner diffs in the
>> future if new structure members get added and need to be initialized.
>
> Good point! I knew about that already, but that's good reasoning why one
> would actually want to do that intentionally.

It also helps us all with the compulsive need for closure ;-)

Thanks,
Jakub