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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20160628180734.GC6733@orbyte.nwl.cc> Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2016 20:07:34 +0200 From: Phil Sutter <phil@....cc> To: David Ahern <dsa@...ulusnetworks.com> 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 Tue, Jun 28, 2016 at 11:59:04AM -0600, David Ahern wrote: > 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. Still not sure if I understand you correctly. These are not typedefs, so users are supposed to know the internals and removing a field means potentially breaking every single user. > > 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. At least someone can laugh about it. :) Cheers, Phil
Powered by blists - more mailing lists