On 3/4/14, 9:36 AM, Brian Foster wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 03, 2014 at 11:25:44PM -0600, Eric Sandeen wrote:
>> sizeof(pointer) is not very relevant; sizeof(*pointer)
>> is a bit more so.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>>
>> diff --git a/src/resvtest.c b/src/resvtest.c
>> index 037d9ea..a07f503 100644
>> --- a/src/resvtest.c
>> +++ b/src/resvtest.c
>> @@ -73,7 +73,7 @@ main(int argc, char **argv)
>> perror("open");
>> exit(1);
>> }
>> - memset(writebuffer, 'A', sizeof(writebuffer));
>> + memset(writebuffer, 'A', sizeof(*writebuffer));
>>
>
> It's not clear to me how much this is intending to write/read. If the
> entire buffer, we should probably use the buffer size.
> sizeof(*writebuffer) is a single byte, no?
>
> Also, there are other instances of the same thing throughout this file.
> I think they need to be consistent, in any event, for the test to work.
yeah, sorry, I was in a bit too much of a rush; just disregard this
for now I guess. too-quick reaction to a gcc compile warning.
-Eric
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
