On 8/5/22 21:02, Sean Christopherson wrote:
Heh, so this amusingly has my review, but I'd rather omit this patch and leave the initialization with the pile of other code that initializes fields for which zero-initialization is insufficient/incorrect. Any objections to dropping this?
Yeah, I was going to say the same. The points before and after this patch are far enough that I'm a bit more confident leaving it out.
Paolo
