On 04/25/2012 07:56 PM, Peter Hutterer wrote: > On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 06:22:07PM -0700, Chase Douglas wrote: >> On 04/25/2012 05:36 PM, Peter Hutterer wrote: >>> We implicitly rely on this already since we calloc the struct. Do it >>> expliclity on DeviceOn(). >>> >>> Signed-off-by: Peter Hutterer <[email protected]> >>> --- >>> This half of the fix to 49161 a bit redundant but better safe than sorry, >>> they say. >> >> I have not problems with it, but this is basically how things are done >> all over the X stack. It's assumed structs are calloc'd where it isn't >> obvious pretty much. Does this mean we have to take up arms against all >> uninitialized members? :) > > in this case the struct alloc is only called once (DEVICE_INIT) but the > struct is re-used for each DeviceOn(). So forcing it to known zero before > it's being used seems sensible.
Ok. Is this an actual bug fix then? my impression when I read it was that this just made the code make more sense to read. -- Chase _______________________________________________ [email protected]: X.Org development Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel Info: http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
