Re: [S390] cio: kernel stack overflow.

["Julio Auto" <mindvortex@gmail.com>]

First of all, about your previous e-mail: you're correct, the members
not explicitly initialized behave like when  a _static_ object is not
explicitly initialized (ie., zero'ing it), instead of behaving like an
_automatic_ object not being explicitly initialized (which was the
kind of behavior I was expecting). This is part of the C99
specification, indeed.

See section 6.7.8, constraints no. 10 and 19, for more info.

On 8/30/06, David Wagner <daw@cs.berkeley.edu> wrote:
> I don't see any obvious place that zeroes out cdev->id.
> In particular, it looks like cdev->id.match_flags and .driver_info
> are never cleared (i.e., they retain whatever old garbage they had
> before).  More importantly, if anyone ever adds any more fields to
> struct ccw_device_id, then they will also be retain old garbage values,
> which is a maintenance pitfall.  Is this right, or did I miss something
> again?

Nicely pointed out, I hadn't thought about this possible maintenance
issue. Looks like a nice place for a memset() to reside.

Cheers,

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