On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 11:04:08AM -0700, Ben Pfaff wrote: > Josh Triplett <josh@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 12:31:55PM -0400, Chris Ball wrote: > >> On Tue, Aug 23 2011, Venkatraman S wrote: > >> > - struct mmc_request mrq = {0}; > >> > + struct mmc_request mrq = {NULL}; > >> > >> The sparse warning is mistaken. Or I'm mistaken. But I suspect it's > >> the sparse warning. > > > > Notice that it says "the remainder of the aggregate". The first field > > still gets initialized with the 0 you supplied, and the first field of > > struct mmc_request has a pointer type. > > That's an understandable position, but I think it would also be > reasonable for sparse to special case using {0} as an > initializer. {0} is a valid initializer for every type and so > it's sometimes used as an initializer for a local variable to get > the same effect that one would have for a static variable without > specifying an initializer. {} produces the same effect, as far as I know. - Josh Triplett -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-mmc" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html