From: "Richardson, Bruce" <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
To: Marc Sune <marc.sune@bisdn.de>,
Thomas Monjalon <thomas.monjalon@6wind.com>
Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] KNI: fix compilation warning 'missing-field-initializers'
Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2014 09:59:41 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <59AF69C657FD0841A61C55336867B5B0344218EF@IRSMSX103.ger.corp.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <54477DBD.1090701@bisdn.de>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Marc Sune
> Sent: Wednesday, October 22, 2014 10:50 AM
> To: Thomas Monjalon
> Cc: dev@dpdk.org
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] KNI: fix compilation warning 'missing-field-
> initializers'
>
> On 22/10/14 10:50, Thomas Monjalon wrote:
> > 2014-10-22 10:42, Marc Sune:
> >> The mutex needs to be initialized to RTE_SPINLOCK_INITIALIZER(0) too, or
> >> move the initialization of the mutex to rte_kni_init().
> > RTE_SPINLOCK_INITIALIZER is { 0 }
> > By initializing one field, all other fields are set to 0, so spinlock also.
> > Just choose one field and it's OK.
> > It should be tested with ICC also but I think it's OK.
>
> Seems that you are right, at least for C99:
>
> C99 Standard 6.7.8.21
>
> If there are fewer initializers in a brace-enclosed list than
> there are elements or members of an aggregate, or fewer characters
> in a string literal used to initialize an array of known size than
> there are elements in the array, the remainder of the aggregate
> shall be initialized implicitly the same as objects that have static
> storage duration.
>
>
> I am not sure if there can be problems with other C dialects (e.g. C11),
> I don't have the std here. So to prevent any problem with them (could
> produce a dead-lock during first rte_kni_alloc() that could be difficult
> to troubleshoot), I would still explicitly initialize the mutex, in one
> or the other way.
>
> Just tell me if you agree and which one you prefer.
>
> I don't have an ICC license. I am always trying it with GCC and clang.
>
> Marc
ICC should be fine with this, it handles just initializing a single member of a structure as described by Thomas above.
/Bruce
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-10-22 9:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-10-17 22:51 [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v4] KNI: use a memzone pool for KNI alloc/release Marc Sune
2014-10-21 4:57 ` Zhang, Helin
2014-10-21 8:29 ` Thomas Monjalon
2014-10-21 10:52 ` Marc Sune
2014-10-22 5:51 ` Liu, Jijiang
2014-10-22 7:10 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] KNI: fix compilation warning 'missing-field-initializers' Marc Sune
2014-10-22 7:14 ` Marc Sune
2014-10-22 8:11 ` Liu, Jijiang
2014-10-22 8:37 ` Thomas Monjalon
2014-10-22 8:42 ` Marc Sune
2014-10-22 8:50 ` Thomas Monjalon
2014-10-22 9:49 ` Marc Sune
2014-10-22 9:59 ` Richardson, Bruce [this message]
2014-10-22 10:00 ` Thomas Monjalon
2014-10-22 10:23 ` [dpdk-dev] [PATCH v2] " Marc Sune
2014-10-22 10:35 ` Thomas Monjalon
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=59AF69C657FD0841A61C55336867B5B0344218EF@IRSMSX103.ger.corp.intel.com \
--to=bruce.richardson@intel.com \
--cc=dev@dpdk.org \
--cc=marc.sune@bisdn.de \
--cc=thomas.monjalon@6wind.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).