Re: minor patch to sched.h

From: Seth Arnold (sarnoldat_private)
Date: Tue Sep 04 2001 - 11:32:17 PDT

  • Next message: Greg KH: "Re: minor patch to sched.h"

    On Tue, Sep 04, 2001 at 11:14:18AM -0700, richard offer wrote:
    > Right, but some are set to 0, which made me wonder. My suspicion is that
    > you're right, but it may still be worthwhile for documentation purposes.
    
    Those are set to zero mostly as placeholders, if I am not mistaken.. If
    they weren't included as zero, there is no way for most compilers to
    allocate the space for them in the structures -- the labels in
    structures are a GCC extension, and one that I don't think is even
    checked (i.e., it is entirely for documentation purposes...)
    
    Not that the Linux kernel has much choice of compilers..
    
    Back to this topic, I've seen other structures in the kernel code where
    the extra elements are silently initialized to zero by the kernel..
    though I tend to agree that we could probably afford the extra word of
    compiled code, and have better documented source. :)
    
    _______________________________________________
    linux-security-module mailing list
    linux-security-moduleat_private
    http://mail.wirex.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-security-module
    



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue Sep 04 2001 - 11:35:02 PDT