Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1348033

Re: [PATCH] perf tests: initialize sa.sa_flags

Show all headers | View raw

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.

Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

[PATCH] perf tests: initialize sa.sa_flags Colin King <colin.king@canonical.com> - 2016-03-02 14:00 +0100
  Re: [PATCH] perf tests: initialize sa.sa_flags Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2016-03-02 14:00 +0100
    Re: [PATCH] perf tests: initialize sa.sa_flags Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org> - 2016-03-02 14:10 +0100
      Re: [PATCH] perf tests: initialize sa.sa_flags Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org> - 2016-03-02 14:30 +0100
        Q: why didn't GCC warn about this uninitialized variable? (was: Re:  [PATCH] perf tests: initialize sa.sa_flags) Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> - 2016-03-03 13:20 +0100
          Re: Q: why didn't GCC warn about this uninitialized variable? Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> - 2016-03-03 13:30 +0100
          Re: Q: why didn't GCC warn about this uninitialized variable? Måns Rullgård <mans@mansr.com> - 2016-03-03 13:40 +0100
            Re: Q: why didn't GCC warn about this uninitialized variable? Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> - 2016-03-03 13:50 +0100
            Re: Q: why didn't GCC warn about this uninitialized variable? Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> - 2016-03-03 13:50 +0100
          Re: Q: why didn't GCC warn about this uninitialized variable? (was:  Re: [PATCH] perf tests: initialize sa.sa_flags) Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com> - 2016-03-03 14:00 +0100
            Re: Q: why didn't GCC warn about this uninitialized variable? (was:  Re: [PATCH] perf tests: initialize sa.sa_flags) Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> - 2016-03-03 14:30 +0100
              Re: Q: why didn't GCC warn about this uninitialized variable? (was:  Re: [PATCH] perf tests: initialize sa.sa_flags) Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> - 2016-03-03 14:50 +0100
                Re: Q: why didn't GCC warn about this uninitialized variable? (was:  Re: [PATCH] perf tests: initialize sa.sa_flags) Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com> - 2016-03-03 15:20 +0100
                Re: Q: why didn't GCC warn about this uninitialized variable? (was:  Re: [PATCH] perf tests: initialize sa.sa_flags) Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> - 2016-03-03 15:50 +0100
                Re: Q: why didn't GCC warn about this uninitialized variable? (was:  Re: [PATCH] perf tests: initialize sa.sa_flags) Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> - 2016-03-03 16:00 +0100
                Re: Q: why didn't GCC warn about this uninitialized variable? (was:  Re: [PATCH] perf tests: initialize sa.sa_flags) Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> - 2016-03-03 16:10 +0100
              Re: Q: why didn't GCC warn about this uninitialized variable? (was:  Re: [PATCH] perf tests: initialize sa.sa_flags) Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com> - 2016-03-03 14:50 +0100
                Re: Q: why didn't GCC warn about this uninitialized variable? (was:  Re: [PATCH] perf tests: initialize sa.sa_flags) Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org> - 2016-03-03 15:10 +0100
      Re: [PATCH] perf tests: initialize sa.sa_flags Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2016-03-02 14:30 +0100
  Re: [PATCH] perf tests: initialize sa.sa_flags Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org> - 2016-03-02 14:10 +0100

csiph-web