Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2016 14:21:27 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>
Cc: Colin King <colin.king@canonical.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf tests: initialize sa.sa_flags
Message-ID: <20160302132127.GG6356@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
References: <1456923322-29697-1-git-send-email-colin.king@canonical.com>
 <20160302125901.GF6356@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <20160302130350.GO3604@kernel.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20160302130350.GO3604@kernel.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2012-12-30)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 634
Lines: 19

On Wed, Mar 02, 2016 at 10:03:50AM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> > Would not something like:
> > 
> > 	sa = (struct sigaction){
> > 		.sa_sigaction = segfault_handler,
> > 	};
> > 	sigfillset(&sa.sa_mask);
> > 
> > Be better?
> 
> I thought about that, but isn't that set in stone? This would be a 4
> liner, while his is a one' :-)

Dunno, you're right that its rather unlikely struct sigaction is going
to grow another member, but I like the above pattern better in general,
makes it harder to end up with uninitalized bits.

When performance matters the above pattern isn't ideal, but that should
not be a concern here.