Re: [PATCH 2/2] mmc: fix integer assignments to pointer

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 02:28:42PM -0400, Chris Ball wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On Tue, Aug 23 2011, Josh Triplett wrote:
> > {} produces the same effect, as far as I know.
> 
> Yeah.  I prefer {0}, because {} is a gcc-ism (the ANSI grammar demands
> initializer-lists be non-empty) and is less readable for people who
> haven't seen the idiom before and are wondering what's going on.
> 
> I'm still a little confused -- the {0} or memset(0, struct ..);
> formations are used often in the kernel, even with pointers involved.
> Is the warning (Wnon_pointer_null) run against the kernel by default,
> or did Venkatraman add it manually?  If default, is it catching bugs?

It is default enabled - and trigger a lot of warnings.
But the kernel idiom is to use NULL for a null pointer - and not to use 0.

Which is why the warning was introduced.

	Sam
--
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


[Index of Archives]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Media]     [Video for Linux]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux