Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Fri, 23 Mar 2001 06:45:31 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Fri, 23 Mar 2001 06:45:20 -0500 Received: from leibniz.math.psu.edu ([146.186.130.2]:15573 "EHLO math.psu.edu") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Fri, 23 Mar 2001 06:45:11 -0500 Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2001 06:44:24 -0500 (EST) From: Alexander Viro To: Andreas Dilger cc: Alexander Viro , "Stephen C. Tweedie" , linux-fsdevel@webber.adilger.int, Linux kernel development list Subject: Re: [linux-lvm] EXT2-fs panic (device lvm(58,0)): In-Reply-To: <200103230548.f2N5mM407684@webber.adilger.int> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 22 Mar 2001, Andreas Dilger wrote: > If this is the case, then all of the other zero initializations can be > removed as well. I figured that if most of the fields needed to be > zeroed, then ones _not_ being zeroed would lead to this problem. Other zero initializations in inode->u certainly can be removed, but whether it's worth doing or not depends is a matter of taste (recall the flamefest around Tigran's crusade against global zero initializers several months ago ;-) The rule is that inode->u is zeroed before fs gets to see the inode, be it in ->read_inode() or after get_empty_inode(). The rest is private business of that fs. That's what ->u is about, after all... Cheers, Al - 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/