On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 06:29:43PM +0300, Alexey Dobriyan wrote: > I wrote stupid runtime checker to look for atomic_t uninitialized usage > and the amount of screaming in logs is surprisingly very big. > > So the question: is there really really an arch for which setting atomic_t > by hand (kzalloc) is not equivalent to atomic_set()? No. atomic_t is 32-bit, and requires all 32 bits to be usable by the callers. It's kind of like NULL might not theoretically be represented by a bit-pattern of all zeroes. In practise, it always is. I don't see the value in your checker, sorry. -- Matthew Wilcox Intel Open Source Technology Centre "Bill, look, we understand that you're interested in selling us this operating system, but compare it to ours. We can't possibly take such a retrograde step." -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arch" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
