* Linus Torvalds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> On Thu, 7 Feb 2008, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >     INIT_HLIST_NODE(&rq->hash);
> >     RB_CLEAR_NODE(&rq->rb_node);
> > -   rq->ioprio = 0;
> > -   rq->buffer = NULL;
> > -   rq->ref_count = 1;
> > -   rq->q = q;
> > -   rq->special = NULL;
> > -   rq->data_len = 0;
> > -   rq->data = NULL;
> > -   rq->nr_phys_segments = 0;
> > -   rq->sense = NULL;
> > -   rq->end_io = NULL;
> > -   rq->end_io_data = NULL;
> > -   rq->completion_data = NULL;
> > -   rq->next_rq = NULL;
> > +   rq->completion_data             = NULL;
> > +   /* rq->elevator_private                 */
> > +   /* rq->elevator_private2                */
> > +   /* rq->rq_disk                          */
> > +   /* rq->start_time                       */
> > +   rq->nr_phys_segments            = 0;
> > +   /* rq->nr_hw_segments                   */
> > +   rq->ioprio                      = 0;
> > +   rq->special                     = NULL;
> > +   rq->buffer                      = NULL;
> ...
> 
> Can we please just stop doing these one-by-one assignments, and just do 
> something like
> 
>       memset(rq, 0, sizeof(*rq));
>       rq->q = q;
>       rq->ref_count = 1;
>       INIT_HLIST_NODE(&rq->hash);
>       RB_CLEAR_NODE(&rq->rb_node);
> 
> instead?
> 
> The memset() is likely faster and smaller than one-by-one assignments 
> anyway, even if the one-by-ones can avoid initializing some field or 
> there ends up being a double initialization..

i definitely agree and do that for all code i write.

But if someone does item by item initialization for some crazy 
performance reason (networking folks tend to have such constructs), it 
should be done i think how i've done it in the patch: by systematically 
listing _every_ field in the structure, in the same order, and 
indicating it clearly when it is not initialized and why.

and there it already shows that we do not initialize a few other members 
that could cause problems later on:

+       rq->data_len                    = 0;
+       /* rq->sense_len                        */
+       rq->data                        = NULL;
+       rq->sense                       = NULL;

why is sense_len not initialized - while data_len is? In any case, these 
days the memclear instructions are dirt cheap and we should just always 
initialize everything to zero by default, especially if it's almost all 
zero-initialized anyway.

        Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Reply via email to