Re: [RFC][PATCH] bitfields API

[Pekka Enberg]

Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > Heh, heh, one alternative is to have a kmemcheck_memset() thingy that  
> > unconditionally zeroes bit fields and maybe is a no-op when kmemcheck is  
> > disabled.
>
> This sounds as if this might cause bugs to disappear when debugging gets 
> turned on?

Yeah, I suppose. The problem doing that unconditionally is that it 
increases kernel text slightly on some architectures (e.g. sparc). 
However, as long as you use the KMEMCHECK_BIT_FIELD annotation only in 
places that give you false positives, it's we should be safe.

		Pekka
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/