Re: [PATCH][RESEND] C99 initializers for DEFINE_RATELIMIT_STATE()

[Bart Van Assche]

On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 6:34 PM, Linus Torvalds
<torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Mon, 10 Nov 2008, Andrew Morton wrote:
>>
>> I already have a patch queued which does this
>> (linux-ratelimith-fixed-missing-initializer-warning.patch).  I sent it
>> to Linus on October 29 and he did not apply it, so I parked it for 2.6.29.
>
> I just don't see the point of the patch at all. It doesn't fix anything,
> and it just makes the code bigger and uglier. We have tons of other
> simple initializers that aren't C99, and we're not going to convert them
> either.

The current version of the header file include/linux/ratelimit.h
triggers false positives when the compiler flag
-Wmissing-field-initializers is specified. The header file
include/linux/ratelimit.h is included directly or indirectly by many
other header files -- inclusion of this file can't be avoided. The
above patch suppresses these false positives by converting the
initializers to C99 style, such that kernel developers who want to
check their code through -Wmissing-field-initializers can use this
compiler flag.  And I do not have plans to send patches for converting
initializers to C99-style for any .c file.

Bart.
--
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/