On 03/24/20 16:18:30, Dan Carpenter wrote: > That's a bit over engineering something which is pretty trivial. > Normally, we would just make the size a define instead of a magic number > 14. My bad, I meant "define", not "macro". > If people change the size in the future (unlikely) and it causes a bug > then they kind of deserve it because they need to ensure all the new > stuff is initialized, right? If they change it and it results in a > buffer overflow then static checkers would complain. If they changed it > and it resulted in uninitialized data being used then it would be zero > so that's okay. I wasn't sure where I should stand on this, that's clearer now. Thanks, Quentin _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
