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-sparse" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
