netdev - Re: [iproute PATCH v3 0/6] Big C99 style initializer rework

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]

Message-ID: <4d5a2616-d5cb-ad3f-e346-a24acc6879aa@cumulusnetworks.com>
Date:	Tue, 28 Jun 2016 11:59:04 -0600
From:	David Ahern <dsa@...ulusnetworks.com>
To:	Phil Sutter <phil@....cc>,
	Stephen Hemminger <shemming@...cade.com>,
	Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
	Nicolas Dichtel <nicolas.dichtel@...nd.com>,
	Julien Floret <julien.floret@...nd.com>,
	"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [iproute PATCH v3 0/6] Big C99 style initializer rework

On 6/28/16 11:58 AM, Phil Sutter wrote:
>> since .ifr_qlen is already referenced in that function seems like your
>> suggestion above (struct ifreq ifr = { .ifr_qlen = 0 };) should be
>> acceptable.
>
> You mean regarding compatibility of using that define? Or are you
> concerned with gcc creating suboptimal code?

no, I was thinking in terms of open coding knowledge of a struct.

> I'd rather use a more generic approach than the above. Retrospectively,
> I'd rather have that brace orgy instead of the above since it's
> intention is more clear and it can be dropped once either gcc guys
> manage to backport their fix or the last distribution has updated it's
> compiler.

ha, that's funny.