> On Jan 25, 2021, at 9:45 AM, Robert Elz wrote:
>
>Date:Mon, 25 Jan 2021 08:19:44 -0800
>From:Jason Thorpe
>Message-ID:
>
> | Using { 0 } makes an assumption about the first member of the
> | structure which is not guaranteed to remain true.
>
> That's
On 25.01.2021 17:19, Jason Thorpe wrote:
>
>> On Jan 25, 2021, at 6:22 AM, Kamil Rytarowski wrote:
>>
>> I have no problem with this change but I am curious why should we use "{
>> }"? It's a C GNU extension and C++ syntax.
>
> Using { 0 } makes an assumption about the first member of the
On Mon, Jan 25, 2021 at 20:28:52 +0300, Valery Ushakov wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 25, 2021 at 08:19:44 -0800, Jason Thorpe wrote:
>
> > > On Jan 25, 2021, at 6:22 AM, Kamil Rytarowski wrote:
> > >
> > > I have no problem with this change but I am curious why should we use "{
> > > }"? It's a C GNU
Date:Mon, 25 Jan 2021 08:19:44 -0800
From:Jason Thorpe
Message-ID:
| Using { 0 } makes an assumption about the first member of the
| structure which is not guaranteed to remain true.
That's right, but you could explicitly init a named field, most likely
the one
On Mon, Jan 25, 2021 at 08:19:44 -0800, Jason Thorpe wrote:
> > On Jan 25, 2021, at 6:22 AM, Kamil Rytarowski wrote:
> >
> > I have no problem with this change but I am curious why should we use "{
> > }"? It's a C GNU extension and C++ syntax.
>
> Using { 0 } makes an assumption about the
> On Jan 25, 2021, at 6:22 AM, Kamil Rytarowski wrote:
>
> I have no problem with this change but I am curious why should we use "{
> }"? It's a C GNU extension and C++ syntax.
Using { 0 } makes an assumption about the first member of the structure which
is not guaranteed to remain true.
--
On 25.01.2021 15:20, Jason R Thorpe wrote:
> Module Name: src
> Committed By: thorpej
> Date: Mon Jan 25 14:20:39 UTC 2021
>
> Modified Files:
> src/sys/arch/arm/altera: cycv_clkmgr.c
> src/sys/arch/arm/amlogic: meson_pinctrl.c meson_pwm.c meson_thermal.c
>
> On Jan 24, 2021, at 10:20 PM, Martin Husemann wrote:
>
>> I kept getting a ?static after non-static declaration? error when building
>> for aarch64.
>
> I guess that was with outdated arm/include/bus_funcs.h and
> sys/bus_proto.h (or where was the previous declaration)?
I did a “cvs
