On Tue, 23 Nov 2010 11:02:44 -0700 Andreas Dilger <adilger.kernel@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 2010-11-23, at 07:45, walter harms wrote: > > Maybe we can convince the gcc people to make 0 padding default. That will not solve the problems for other compilers but when they claim "works like gcc" we can press then to support this also. I can imagine that this will close some other subtle leaks also. > > It makes the most sense to tackle this at the GCC level, since the added overhead of doing memset(0) on the whole struct may be non-trivial for commonly-used and/or large structures. (My, what long lines you have!) We can't reasonably address this with gcc changes. If gcc starts doing what we want in the next release, how long will it be until that release is the *oldest* version of gcc which the kernel may be compiled with? Five years? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
