Geert Uytterhoeven writes:
> Hi Alex,
>
> On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 5:30 AM Alex Williamson
> wrote:
>> The below patch comes about from the build regressions and improvements
>> list you've sent out, but something doesn't add up that we'd be testing
>> with an old compiler where initialization wit
On Wed, 23 Jan 2019 15:07:11 +1100
Alexey Kardashevskiy wrote:
> Using the {0} construct as a generic initializer is perfectly fine in C,
> however due to a bug in old gcc there is a warning:
>
> + /kisskb/src/drivers/vfio/pci/vfio_pci_nvlink2.c: warning: (near
> initialization for 'cap.header
Hi Alex,
On Wed, Jan 23, 2019 at 5:30 AM Alex Williamson
wrote:
> The below patch comes about from the build regressions and improvements
> list you've sent out, but something doesn't add up that we'd be testing
> with an old compiler where initialization with { 0 } generates a
> "missing braces
Hi Geert,
The below patch comes about from the build regressions and improvements
list you've sent out, but something doesn't add up that we'd be testing
with an old compiler where initialization with { 0 } generates a
"missing braces around initialization" warning. Is this really the
case or are
Using the {0} construct as a generic initializer is perfectly fine in C,
however due to a bug in old gcc there is a warning:
+ /kisskb/src/drivers/vfio/pci/vfio_pci_nvlink2.c: warning: (near
initialization for 'cap.header') [-Wmissing-braces]: => 181:9
Since for whatever reason we still want t
