Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751367AbWH3TZH (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 Aug 2006 15:25:07 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751365AbWH3TZH (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 Aug 2006 15:25:07 -0400 Received: from wx-out-0506.google.com ([66.249.82.227]:44582 "EHLO wx-out-0506.google.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751366AbWH3TZF (ORCPT ); Wed, 30 Aug 2006 15:25:05 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=NNkEd8UfOawFYjO1AmUlLbE/mzYDkMLuoB0zNc1Zo7x/0yLDSRNQJf3RAdisKc9acgppz4lcQrKw7BClJm5D/PXmlLYf58NskZ3BiTYWSa+phperbILQQknlFSymK8Cv5Hk3oMDm2/5MFM13sWSqJQsjAbBmz7gPGpB5bBMKWQ8= Message-ID: <18d709710608301225x7407b216o74420d0b4034a484@mail.gmail.com> Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2006 16:25:03 -0300 From: "Julio Auto" To: "David Wagner" Subject: Re: [S390] cio: kernel stack overflow. Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <20060830124047.GA22276@skybase> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1295 Lines: 29 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 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/