On Wed, Mar 25, 2020 at 09:19:24AM +0000, Quentin Deslandes wrote: > 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 Dan and Quentin, thanks for your time to review my work, and make comments. oscar carter _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel
