From: Mark Rustad <[email protected]>
Resolve some missing-field-initializers warnings by using
designated initialization.
Signed-off-by: Mark Rustad <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Jeff Kirsher <[email protected]>
---
drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c b/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c
index db8c449..4d59256 100644
--- a/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c
+++ b/drivers/scsi/scsi_lib.c
@@ -47,7 +47,7 @@ struct scsi_host_sg_pool {
mempool_t *pool;
};
-#define SP(x) { x, "sgpool-" __stringify(x) }
+#define SP(x) { .size = x, "sgpool-" __stringify(x) }
#if (SCSI_MAX_SG_SEGMENTS < 32)
#error SCSI_MAX_SG_SEGMENTS is too small (must be 32 or greater)
#endif
--
1.9.3
On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 06:38:53AM -0700, Jeff Kirsher wrote:
> From: Mark Rustad <[email protected]>
>
> Resolve some missing-field-initializers warnings by using
> designated initialization.
What tool is warning about these? This construct is perfectly valid C.
The warning appears in W=2 builds. I had another way to silence it by using diagnostic control macros, but those macros were not accepted. Using a single designated initialization also silences it.
Sent from my iPhone
> On Oct 17, 2014, at 8:26 AM, "Christoph Hellwig" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 06:38:53AM -0700, Jeff Kirsher wrote:
>> From: Mark Rustad <[email protected]>
>>
>> Resolve some missing-field-initializers warnings by using
>> designated initialization.
>
> What tool is warning about these? This construct is perfectly valid C.
On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 10:44:36PM +0000, Rustad, Mark D wrote:
> The warning appears in W=2 builds. I had another way to silence it by using diagnostic control macros, but those macros were not accepted. Using a single designated initialization also silences it.
Oh well. I think the earlier version was slightly cleaner, but if it
helps people to catch real bugs better I'm happy to apply it.
Thanks,
applied to the core-for-3.19 branch.