Re: [PATCH 2/2] Fix sparse warnings

From: Stephen Boyd <bebarino@gmail.com>
Date: Mar 21, 2011, 10:12 UTC
Message-ID: <4D872490.4000500@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <4D872420.8080501@viscovery.net>

On 03/21/11 03:10, Johannes Sixt wrote:

Show 18 quoted lines

> Am 3/21/2011 10:45, schrieb Stephen Boyd:
>> diff --git a/daemon.c b/daemon.c
>> index 347fd0c..4c8346d 100644
>> --- a/daemon.c
>> +++ b/daemon.c
>> @@ -660,7 +660,7 @@ static void check_dead_children(void)
>>  static char **cld_argv;
>>  static void handle(int incoming, struct sockaddr *addr, socklen_t addrlen)
>>  {
>> -	struct child_process cld = { 0 };
>> +	struct child_process cld = { NULL };
> 
> IMO this change is not good.
> 
> The purpose of { 0} is not to initialize (only) the first member, but
> rather to serve as a visual marker that says "We want the complete struct
> zero-initialized".
>

Sure that's fine. I was iffy on that change, but decided to try to silence sparse as much as possible. I'm fine with dropping those hunks.