Ah,
bzero(c, sizeof *c);
I suppose.
Brian Feldman wrote:
>
> I make a habit of checking out any interesting kernel changes in full, and one
> thing I found in the recent diff by Mr. Wollman for kern_timeout.c is:
>
> +void
> +callout_init(c)
> + struct callout *c;
> +{
> +
< said:
> Understood, but the point being that Garrett is an experienced
> programmer, and made this mistake. The latter version avoids any
> possibilities of said mistake.
...and instead opens up the possibility of the same bug if the type of
the structure is ever changed.
I will fix this (cur
On Sat, 6 Mar 1999, Nate Williams wrote:
> > > > > I make a habit of checking out any interesting kernel changes in
> > > > > full, and one
> > > > > thing I found in the recent diff by Mr. Wollman for kern_timeout.c is:
> > > > >
> > > > > +void
> > > > > +callout_init(c)
> > > > > + stru
Nate Williams wrote:
>> > +void
>> > +callout_init(c)
>> > + struct callout *c;
>> > +{
>> > + bzero(c, sizeof c);
>> > }
>> >
>> > That doesn't look correct, does it?
>>
>> Agreed. I think it should be "sizeof *c".
>
> Ahh, I see. I think it should say
>
>bzero(c, sizeo
> > > > I make a habit of checking out any interesting kernel changes in full,
> > > > and one
> > > > thing I found in the recent diff by Mr. Wollman for kern_timeout.c is:
> > > >
> > > > +void
> > > > +callout_init(c)
> > > > + struct callout *c;
> > > > +{
> > > > + bzero(c, size
On Sat, 6 Mar 1999, Nate Williams wrote:
> > > I make a habit of checking out any interesting kernel changes in full,
> > > and one
> > > thing I found in the recent diff by Mr. Wollman for kern_timeout.c is:
> > >
> > > +void
> > > +callout_init(c)
> > > + struct callout *c;
> > > +{
> >
> > I make a habit of checking out any interesting kernel changes in full, and
> > one
> > thing I found in the recent diff by Mr. Wollman for kern_timeout.c is:
> >
> > +void
> > +callout_init(c)
> > + struct callout *c;
> > +{
> > + bzero(c, sizeof c);
> > }
> >
> > That doesn't
> I make a habit of checking out any interesting kernel changes in full, and one
> thing I found in the recent diff by Mr. Wollman for kern_timeout.c is:
>
> +void
> +callout_init(c)
> + struct callout *c;
> +{
> + bzero(c, sizeof c);
> }
>
> That doesn't look correct, does it?
Car
In article ,
Brian Feldman wrote:
> I make a habit of checking out any interesting kernel changes in full, and one
> thing I found in the recent diff by Mr. Wollman for kern_timeout.c is:
>
> +void
> +callout_init(c)
> + struct callout *c;
> +{
> + bzero(c, sizeof c);
> }
>
> That
At 10:59 AM 3/6/99 -0500, Brian Feldman wrote:
>I make a habit of checking out any interesting kernel changes in full, and
one
>thing I found in the recent diff by Mr. Wollman for kern_timeout.c is:
>
>+void
>+callout_init(c)
>+ struct callout *c;
>+{
>+ bzero(c, sizeof c);
> }
>
>That
I make a habit of checking out any interesting kernel changes in full, and one
thing I found in the recent diff by Mr. Wollman for kern_timeout.c is:
+void
+callout_init(c)
+ struct callout *c;
+{
+ bzero(c, sizeof c);
}
That doesn't look correct, does it?
Brian Feldman
11 matches
Mail list logo
