[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1502811469.4936.84.camel@edumazet-glaptop3.roam.corp.google.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2017 08:37:49 -0700
From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To: Marcelo Ricardo Leitner <marcelo.leitner@...il.com>
Cc: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
hideaki.yoshifuji@...aclelinux.com, glider@...gle.com,
dvyukov@...gle.com, kcc@...gle.com, edumazet@...gle.com,
lucien.xin@...il.com, vyasevich@...il.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-sctp@...r.kernel.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] sctp: fully initialize the IPv6 address in
sctp_v6_to_addr()
On Tue, 2017-08-15 at 12:05 -0300, Marcelo Ricardo Leitner wrote:
> Ok, but I should see a difference in the generated code, right?
Depends on the compiler. Have you tried older versions ?
One argument is that following struct member definition eases code
review.
(It is easier to catch a field init is missing)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists