* Re: [iproute PATCH v3 0/6] Big C99 style initializer rework
[not found] <d6784d8bb2d84ceab6c1719e32e8fa8e@HQ1WP-EXMB11.corp.brocade.com>
@ 2016-06-27 17:59 ` Stephen Hemminger
2016-06-27 18:23 ` Phil Sutter
0 siblings, 1 reply; 12+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Hemminger @ 2016-06-27 17:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Phil Sutter
Cc: Daniel Borkmann, David Ahern, Nicolas Dichtel, Julien Floret, netdev
On Thu, 23 Jun 2016 17:34:08 +0000
Phil Sutter <phil@nwl.cc> wrote:
> This is v3 of my C99-style initializer related patch series. The changes
> since v2 are:
>
> - Flattened embedded struct's initializers:
> Since the field names are very short, I figured it makes more sense to
> keep indenting low. Also, the same style is already used in
> ip/xfrm_policy.c so take that as an example.
>
> - Moved leftover nlmsg_seq initializing into the common place as well:
> I was unsure whether this is a good idea at first (due to the
> increment), but again it's done in ip/xfrm_policy.c as well so should
> be fine.
>
> - Added a comma after the last field initializer as suggested by Jakub.
>
> - Dropped patch 7 since it was NACKed.
>
> - Eliminated checkpatch non-compliance.
>
> - Second go at union bpf_attr in tc/tc_bpf.c:
> I figured that while it is not possible to initialize fields, gcc-3.4.6
> does not complain when setting the whole union to zero using '= {0}'.
> So I did this and thereby at least got rid of the memset calls.
>
> For reference, here's the v2 changelog:
>
> - Rebased onto current upstream master:
> My own commit a0a73b298a579 ("tc: m_action: Use C99 style initializers
> for struct req") contains most of the changes to tc/m_action.c already,
> so I put the remaining ones into a dedicated patch (the first one here)
> with a better description.
>
> - Tested against gcc-3.4.6:
> This is the oldest gcc version I was able to install locally. It indeed
> does not like the former changes in tc/tc_bpf.c, so I reverted them.
> Apart from emitting many warnings, it successfully compiles the
> sources.
>
> In the process of compatibility testing, I made a few more changes which
> make sense to have:
>
> - New patch 5 allows to conveniently override the compiler via command
> line.
>
> - New patch 6 eliminates a warning with old gcc but looks valid in
> general.
>
> - A warning made me look at ip/tcp_metrics.c and I found a minor code
> simplification (patch 7).
>
> Phil Sutter (6):
> tc: m_action: Improve conversion to C99 style initializers
> Use C99 style initializers everywhere
> Replace malloc && memset by calloc
> No need to initialize rtattr fields before parsing
> Makefile: Allow to override CC
> misc/ifstat: simplify unsigned value comparison
>
> Makefile | 4 +-
> bridge/fdb.c | 25 ++++++------
> bridge/link.c | 14 +++----
> bridge/mdb.c | 17 ++++-----
> bridge/vlan.c | 17 ++++-----
> genl/ctrl.c | 44 +++++++++------------
> genl/genl.c | 3 +-
> ip/ip6tunnel.c | 10 ++---
> ip/ipaddress.c | 33 +++++++---------
> ip/ipaddrlabel.c | 21 ++++------
> ip/iplink.c | 61 ++++++++++++-----------------
> ip/iplink_can.c | 4 +-
> ip/ipmaddr.c | 25 ++++--------
> ip/ipmroute.c | 8 +---
> ip/ipneigh.c | 30 ++++++---------
> ip/ipnetconf.c | 10 ++---
> ip/ipnetns.c | 39 +++++++++----------
> ip/ipntable.c | 25 ++++--------
> ip/iproute.c | 78 +++++++++++++------------------------
> ip/iprule.c | 22 +++++------
> ip/iptoken.c | 19 ++++-----
> ip/iptunnel.c | 31 +++++----------
> ip/ipxfrm.c | 26 ++++---------
> ip/link_gre.c | 18 ++++-----
> ip/link_gre6.c | 18 ++++-----
> ip/link_ip6tnl.c | 25 +++++-------
> ip/link_iptnl.c | 22 +++++------
> ip/link_vti.c | 18 ++++-----
> ip/link_vti6.c | 18 ++++-----
> ip/xfrm_policy.c | 99 +++++++++++++++++++----------------------------
> ip/xfrm_state.c | 110 ++++++++++++++++++++++-------------------------------
> lib/libnetlink.c | 77 ++++++++++++++-----------------------
> lib/ll_map.c | 1 -
> lib/names.c | 7 +---
> misc/arpd.c | 64 ++++++++++++++-----------------
> misc/ifstat.c | 2 +-
> misc/lnstat.c | 6 +--
> misc/lnstat_util.c | 4 +-
> misc/ss.c | 37 +++++++-----------
> tc/e_bpf.c | 7 +---
> tc/em_canid.c | 4 +-
> tc/em_cmp.c | 4 +-
> tc/em_ipset.c | 4 +-
> tc/em_meta.c | 4 +-
> tc/em_nbyte.c | 4 +-
> tc/em_u32.c | 4 +-
> tc/f_flow.c | 3 --
> tc/f_flower.c | 3 +-
> tc/f_fw.c | 6 +--
> tc/f_route.c | 3 --
> tc/f_rsvp.c | 6 +--
> tc/f_u32.c | 12 ++----
> tc/m_action.c | 26 ++++---------
> tc/m_bpf.c | 5 +--
> tc/m_csum.c | 4 +-
> tc/m_ematch.c | 4 +-
> tc/m_gact.c | 5 +--
> tc/m_ife.c | 5 +--
> tc/m_ipt.c | 13 ++-----
> tc/m_mirred.c | 7 +---
> tc/m_nat.c | 4 +-
> tc/m_pedit.c | 11 ++----
> tc/m_police.c | 5 +--
> tc/q_atm.c | 3 +-
> tc/q_cbq.c | 22 +++--------
> tc/q_choke.c | 4 +-
> tc/q_codel.c | 3 +-
> tc/q_dsmark.c | 1 -
> tc/q_fifo.c | 4 +-
> tc/q_fq_codel.c | 3 +-
> tc/q_hfsc.c | 13 ++-----
> tc/q_htb.c | 15 +++-----
> tc/q_netem.c | 16 +++-----
> tc/q_red.c | 4 +-
> tc/q_sfb.c | 17 ++++-----
> tc/q_sfq.c | 4 +-
> tc/q_tbf.c | 4 +-
> tc/tc.c | 9 ++---
> tc/tc_bpf.c | 58 ++++++++++------------------
> tc/tc_class.c | 38 +++++++-----------
> tc/tc_exec.c | 6 +--
> tc/tc_filter.c | 33 ++++++----------
> tc/tc_qdisc.c | 33 ++++++----------
> tc/tc_stab.c | 4 +-
> tc/tc_util.c | 3 +-
> 85 files changed, 565 insertions(+), 977 deletions(-)
I like the idea and it makes code cleaner. But doing this introduces lots of warnings
and that is not acceptable.
ip
CC ip.o
CC ipaddress.o
ipaddress.c: In function ‘print_queuelen’:
ipaddress.c:175:10: warning: missing braces around initializer [-Wmissing-braces]
struct ifreq ifr = { 0 };
^
ipaddress.c:175:10: warning: (near initialization for ‘ifr.ifr_ifrn’) [-Wmissing-braces]
CC ipaddrlabel.o
CC iproute.o
CC iprule.o
CC ipnetns.o
CC rtm_map.o
CC iptunnel.o
iptunnel.c: In function ‘parse_args’:
iptunnel.c:183:12: warning: missing braces around initializer [-Wmissing-braces]
struct ip_tunnel_parm old_p = { 0 };
^
iptunnel.c:183:12: warning: (near initialization for ‘old_p.name’) [-Wmissing-braces]
iptunnel.c: In function ‘print_tunnel’:
iptunnel.c:296:9: warning: missing braces around initializer [-Wmissing-braces]
struct ip_tunnel_6rd ip6rd = { 0 };
^
iptunnel.c:296:9: warning: (near initialization for ‘ip6rd.prefix’) [-Wmissing-braces]
iptunnel.c:310:10: warning: missing braces around initializer [-Wmissing-braces]
struct ip_tunnel_prl prl[16] = { 0 };
^
iptunnel.c:310:10: warning: (near initialization for ‘prl[0]’) [-Wmissing-braces]
iptunnel.c: In function ‘do_tunnels_list’:
iptunnel.c:402:10: warning: missing braces around initializer [-Wmissing-braces]
struct ip_tunnel_parm p1 = { 0 };
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread* Re: [iproute PATCH v3 0/6] Big C99 style initializer rework
2016-06-27 17:59 ` [iproute PATCH v3 0/6] Big C99 style initializer rework Stephen Hemminger
@ 2016-06-27 18:23 ` Phil Sutter
2016-06-27 21:10 ` Stephen Hemminger
0 siblings, 1 reply; 12+ messages in thread
From: Phil Sutter @ 2016-06-27 18:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stephen Hemminger
Cc: Daniel Borkmann, David Ahern, Nicolas Dichtel, Julien Floret, netdev
Hi,
On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 10:59:12AM -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> On Thu, 23 Jun 2016 17:34:08 +0000
> Phil Sutter <phil@nwl.cc> wrote:
>
> > This is v3 of my C99-style initializer related patch series. The changes
> > since v2 are:
[...]
>
> I like the idea and it makes code cleaner. But doing this introduces lots of warnings
> and that is not acceptable.
> ip
> CC ip.o
> CC ipaddress.o
> ipaddress.c: In function ‘print_queuelen’:
> ipaddress.c:175:10: warning: missing braces around initializer [-Wmissing-braces]
> struct ifreq ifr = { 0 };
> ^
I saw these too with gcc-3.4.6 but not with 5.3.0. It appears to be a
gcc bug[1]. One possible workaround is to match the brace level of the
first field, but it's quite ugly: [2]. Another way might be to
initialize one of the fields to zero, like so:
| struct ifreq ifr = { .ifr_qlen = 0 };
What do you think?
Thanks, Phil
[1] https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53119
[2] http://nwl.cc/cgi-bin/git/gitweb.cgi?p=iproute2.git;a=commitdiff;h=a1cbf2b63c995b2f633c5b4699248ab308b201d2;hp=3809cfec65b03716d1d0360338126df4b4f3fbf6
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread* Re: [iproute PATCH v3 0/6] Big C99 style initializer rework
2016-06-27 18:23 ` Phil Sutter
@ 2016-06-27 21:10 ` Stephen Hemminger
2016-06-28 17:37 ` Phil Sutter
0 siblings, 1 reply; 12+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Hemminger @ 2016-06-27 21:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Phil Sutter
Cc: Daniel Borkmann, David Ahern, Nicolas Dichtel, Julien Floret, netdev
On Mon, 27 Jun 2016 20:23:02 +0200
Phil Sutter <phil@nwl.cc> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 10:59:12AM -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> > On Thu, 23 Jun 2016 17:34:08 +0000
> > Phil Sutter <phil@nwl.cc> wrote:
> >
> > > This is v3 of my C99-style initializer related patch series. The changes
> > > since v2 are:
> [...]
> >
> > I like the idea and it makes code cleaner. But doing this introduces lots of warnings
> > and that is not acceptable.
> > ip
> > CC ip.o
> > CC ipaddress.o
> > ipaddress.c: In function ‘print_queuelen’:
> > ipaddress.c:175:10: warning: missing braces around initializer [-Wmissing-braces]
> > struct ifreq ifr = { 0 };
> > ^
>
> I saw these too with gcc-3.4.6 but not with 5.3.0. It appears to be a
> gcc bug[1]. One possible workaround is to match the brace level of the
> first field, but it's quite ugly: [2]. Another way might be to
> initialize one of the fields to zero, like so:
>
> | struct ifreq ifr = { .ifr_qlen = 0 };
>
> What do you think?
>
> Thanks, Phil
>
> [1] https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53119
> [2] http://nwl.cc/cgi-bin/git/gitweb.cgi?p=iproute2.git;a=commitdiff;h=a1cbf2b63c995b2f633c5b4699248ab308b201d2;hp=3809cfec65b03716d1d0360338126df4b4f3fbf6
I am using gcc on Debian stable which is 5.3.1.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread* Re: [iproute PATCH v3 0/6] Big C99 style initializer rework
2016-06-27 21:10 ` Stephen Hemminger
@ 2016-06-28 17:37 ` Phil Sutter
2016-06-28 17:37 ` David Ahern
0 siblings, 1 reply; 12+ messages in thread
From: Phil Sutter @ 2016-06-28 17:37 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stephen Hemminger
Cc: Daniel Borkmann, David Ahern, Nicolas Dichtel, Julien Floret, netdev
On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 02:10:49PM -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Jun 2016 20:23:02 +0200
> Phil Sutter <phil@nwl.cc> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 10:59:12AM -0700, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> > > On Thu, 23 Jun 2016 17:34:08 +0000
> > > Phil Sutter <phil@nwl.cc> wrote:
> > >
> > > > This is v3 of my C99-style initializer related patch series. The changes
> > > > since v2 are:
> > [...]
> > >
> > > I like the idea and it makes code cleaner. But doing this introduces lots of warnings
> > > and that is not acceptable.
> > > ip
> > > CC ip.o
> > > CC ipaddress.o
> > > ipaddress.c: In function ‘print_queuelen’:
> > > ipaddress.c:175:10: warning: missing braces around initializer [-Wmissing-braces]
> > > struct ifreq ifr = { 0 };
> > > ^
> >
> > I saw these too with gcc-3.4.6 but not with 5.3.0. It appears to be a
> > gcc bug[1]. One possible workaround is to match the brace level of the
> > first field, but it's quite ugly: [2]. Another way might be to
> > initialize one of the fields to zero, like so:
> >
> > | struct ifreq ifr = { .ifr_qlen = 0 };
> >
> > What do you think?
> >
> > Thanks, Phil
> >
> > [1] https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53119
> > [2] http://nwl.cc/cgi-bin/git/gitweb.cgi?p=iproute2.git;a=commitdiff;h=a1cbf2b63c995b2f633c5b4699248ab308b201d2;hp=3809cfec65b03716d1d0360338126df4b4f3fbf6
>
> I am using gcc on Debian stable which is 5.3.1.
Hmm. In a fresh install of Debian 8.5 I see the warnings as well, but it
has gcc-4.9.2-10 as most recent version.
Another thing I noticed: Using empty braces ('{}') instead of the
universal zero initializer seems to work without causing warnings (at
least unless '-pedantic' is used).
Cheers, Phil
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread* Re: [iproute PATCH v3 0/6] Big C99 style initializer rework
2016-06-28 17:37 ` Phil Sutter
@ 2016-06-28 17:37 ` David Ahern
2016-06-28 17:58 ` Phil Sutter
0 siblings, 1 reply; 12+ messages in thread
From: David Ahern @ 2016-06-28 17:37 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Phil Sutter, Stephen Hemminger, Daniel Borkmann, Nicolas Dichtel,
Julien Floret, netdev
On 6/28/16 11:37 AM, Phil Sutter wrote:
>>> I saw these too with gcc-3.4.6 but not with 5.3.0. It appears to be a
>>> gcc bug[1]. One possible workaround is to match the brace level of the
>>> first field, but it's quite ugly: [2]. Another way might be to
>>> initialize one of the fields to zero, like so:
>>>
>>> | struct ifreq ifr = { .ifr_qlen = 0 };
>>>
>>> What do you think?
>>>
>>> Thanks, Phil
>>>
>>> [1] https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53119
>>> [2] http://nwl.cc/cgi-bin/git/gitweb.cgi?p=iproute2.git;a=commitdiff;h=a1cbf2b63c995b2f633c5b4699248ab308b201d2;hp=3809cfec65b03716d1d0360338126df4b4f3fbf6
>>
>> I am using gcc on Debian stable which is 5.3.1.
>
> Hmm. In a fresh install of Debian 8.5 I see the warnings as well, but it
> has gcc-4.9.2-10 as most recent version.
>
> Another thing I noticed: Using empty braces ('{}') instead of the
> universal zero initializer seems to work without causing warnings (at
> least unless '-pedantic' is used).
since .ifr_qlen is already referenced in that function seems like your
suggestion above (struct ifreq ifr = { .ifr_qlen = 0 };) should be
acceptable.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread* Re: [iproute PATCH v3 0/6] Big C99 style initializer rework
2016-06-28 17:37 ` David Ahern
@ 2016-06-28 17:58 ` Phil Sutter
2016-06-28 17:59 ` David Ahern
0 siblings, 1 reply; 12+ messages in thread
From: Phil Sutter @ 2016-06-28 17:58 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: David Ahern
Cc: Stephen Hemminger, Daniel Borkmann, Nicolas Dichtel,
Julien Floret, netdev
On Tue, Jun 28, 2016 at 11:37:43AM -0600, David Ahern wrote:
> On 6/28/16 11:37 AM, Phil Sutter wrote:
> >>> I saw these too with gcc-3.4.6 but not with 5.3.0. It appears to be a
> >>> gcc bug[1]. One possible workaround is to match the brace level of the
> >>> first field, but it's quite ugly: [2]. Another way might be to
> >>> initialize one of the fields to zero, like so:
> >>>
> >>> | struct ifreq ifr = { .ifr_qlen = 0 };
> >>>
> >>> What do you think?
> >>>
> >>> Thanks, Phil
> >>>
> >>> [1] https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=53119
> >>> [2] http://nwl.cc/cgi-bin/git/gitweb.cgi?p=iproute2.git;a=commitdiff;h=a1cbf2b63c995b2f633c5b4699248ab308b201d2;hp=3809cfec65b03716d1d0360338126df4b4f3fbf6
> >>
> >> I am using gcc on Debian stable which is 5.3.1.
> >
> > Hmm. In a fresh install of Debian 8.5 I see the warnings as well, but it
> > has gcc-4.9.2-10 as most recent version.
> >
> > Another thing I noticed: Using empty braces ('{}') instead of the
> > universal zero initializer seems to work without causing warnings (at
> > least unless '-pedantic' is used).
>
> since .ifr_qlen is already referenced in that function seems like your
> suggestion above (struct ifreq ifr = { .ifr_qlen = 0 };) should be
> acceptable.
You mean regarding compatibility of using that define? Or are you
concerned with gcc creating suboptimal code?
I'd rather use a more generic approach than the above. Retrospectively,
I'd rather have that brace orgy instead of the above since it's
intention is more clear and it can be dropped once either gcc guys
manage to backport their fix or the last distribution has updated it's
compiler.
Cheers, Phil
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread* Re: [iproute PATCH v3 0/6] Big C99 style initializer rework
2016-06-28 17:58 ` Phil Sutter
@ 2016-06-28 17:59 ` David Ahern
2016-06-28 18:07 ` Phil Sutter
0 siblings, 1 reply; 12+ messages in thread
From: David Ahern @ 2016-06-28 17:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Phil Sutter, Stephen Hemminger, Daniel Borkmann, Nicolas Dichtel,
Julien Floret, netdev
On 6/28/16 11:58 AM, Phil Sutter wrote:
>> since .ifr_qlen is already referenced in that function seems like your
>> suggestion above (struct ifreq ifr = { .ifr_qlen = 0 };) should be
>> acceptable.
>
> You mean regarding compatibility of using that define? Or are you
> concerned with gcc creating suboptimal code?
no, I was thinking in terms of open coding knowledge of a struct.
> I'd rather use a more generic approach than the above. Retrospectively,
> I'd rather have that brace orgy instead of the above since it's
> intention is more clear and it can be dropped once either gcc guys
> manage to backport their fix or the last distribution has updated it's
> compiler.
ha, that's funny.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread* Re: [iproute PATCH v3 0/6] Big C99 style initializer rework
2016-06-28 17:59 ` David Ahern
@ 2016-06-28 18:07 ` Phil Sutter
0 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: Phil Sutter @ 2016-06-28 18:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: David Ahern
Cc: Stephen Hemminger, Daniel Borkmann, Nicolas Dichtel,
Julien Floret, netdev
On Tue, Jun 28, 2016 at 11:59:04AM -0600, David Ahern wrote:
> On 6/28/16 11:58 AM, Phil Sutter wrote:
> >> since .ifr_qlen is already referenced in that function seems like your
> >> suggestion above (struct ifreq ifr = { .ifr_qlen = 0 };) should be
> >> acceptable.
> >
> > You mean regarding compatibility of using that define? Or are you
> > concerned with gcc creating suboptimal code?
>
> no, I was thinking in terms of open coding knowledge of a struct.
Still not sure if I understand you correctly. These are not typedefs, so
users are supposed to know the internals and removing a field means
potentially breaking every single user.
> > I'd rather use a more generic approach than the above. Retrospectively,
> > I'd rather have that brace orgy instead of the above since it's
> > intention is more clear and it can be dropped once either gcc guys
> > manage to backport their fix or the last distribution has updated it's
> > compiler.
>
> ha, that's funny.
At least someone can laugh about it. :)
Cheers, Phil
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* [iproute PATCH v3 0/6] Big C99 style initializer rework
@ 2016-06-23 17:34 Phil Sutter
2016-06-24 9:17 ` David Laight
2016-06-24 13:12 ` Nicolas Dichtel
0 siblings, 2 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: Phil Sutter @ 2016-06-23 17:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Stephen Hemminger
Cc: Daniel Borkmann, David Ahern, Nicolas Dichtel, Julien Floret, netdev
This is v3 of my C99-style initializer related patch series. The changes
since v2 are:
- Flattened embedded struct's initializers:
Since the field names are very short, I figured it makes more sense to
keep indenting low. Also, the same style is already used in
ip/xfrm_policy.c so take that as an example.
- Moved leftover nlmsg_seq initializing into the common place as well:
I was unsure whether this is a good idea at first (due to the
increment), but again it's done in ip/xfrm_policy.c as well so should
be fine.
- Added a comma after the last field initializer as suggested by Jakub.
- Dropped patch 7 since it was NACKed.
- Eliminated checkpatch non-compliance.
- Second go at union bpf_attr in tc/tc_bpf.c:
I figured that while it is not possible to initialize fields, gcc-3.4.6
does not complain when setting the whole union to zero using '= {0}'.
So I did this and thereby at least got rid of the memset calls.
For reference, here's the v2 changelog:
- Rebased onto current upstream master:
My own commit a0a73b298a579 ("tc: m_action: Use C99 style initializers
for struct req") contains most of the changes to tc/m_action.c already,
so I put the remaining ones into a dedicated patch (the first one here)
with a better description.
- Tested against gcc-3.4.6:
This is the oldest gcc version I was able to install locally. It indeed
does not like the former changes in tc/tc_bpf.c, so I reverted them.
Apart from emitting many warnings, it successfully compiles the
sources.
In the process of compatibility testing, I made a few more changes which
make sense to have:
- New patch 5 allows to conveniently override the compiler via command
line.
- New patch 6 eliminates a warning with old gcc but looks valid in
general.
- A warning made me look at ip/tcp_metrics.c and I found a minor code
simplification (patch 7).
Phil Sutter (6):
tc: m_action: Improve conversion to C99 style initializers
Use C99 style initializers everywhere
Replace malloc && memset by calloc
No need to initialize rtattr fields before parsing
Makefile: Allow to override CC
misc/ifstat: simplify unsigned value comparison
Makefile | 4 +-
bridge/fdb.c | 25 ++++++------
bridge/link.c | 14 +++----
bridge/mdb.c | 17 ++++-----
bridge/vlan.c | 17 ++++-----
genl/ctrl.c | 44 +++++++++------------
genl/genl.c | 3 +-
ip/ip6tunnel.c | 10 ++---
ip/ipaddress.c | 33 +++++++---------
ip/ipaddrlabel.c | 21 ++++------
ip/iplink.c | 61 ++++++++++++-----------------
ip/iplink_can.c | 4 +-
ip/ipmaddr.c | 25 ++++--------
ip/ipmroute.c | 8 +---
ip/ipneigh.c | 30 ++++++---------
ip/ipnetconf.c | 10 ++---
ip/ipnetns.c | 39 +++++++++----------
ip/ipntable.c | 25 ++++--------
ip/iproute.c | 78 +++++++++++++------------------------
ip/iprule.c | 22 +++++------
ip/iptoken.c | 19 ++++-----
ip/iptunnel.c | 31 +++++----------
ip/ipxfrm.c | 26 ++++---------
ip/link_gre.c | 18 ++++-----
ip/link_gre6.c | 18 ++++-----
ip/link_ip6tnl.c | 25 +++++-------
ip/link_iptnl.c | 22 +++++------
ip/link_vti.c | 18 ++++-----
ip/link_vti6.c | 18 ++++-----
ip/xfrm_policy.c | 99 +++++++++++++++++++----------------------------
ip/xfrm_state.c | 110 ++++++++++++++++++++++-------------------------------
lib/libnetlink.c | 77 ++++++++++++++-----------------------
lib/ll_map.c | 1 -
lib/names.c | 7 +---
misc/arpd.c | 64 ++++++++++++++-----------------
misc/ifstat.c | 2 +-
misc/lnstat.c | 6 +--
misc/lnstat_util.c | 4 +-
misc/ss.c | 37 +++++++-----------
tc/e_bpf.c | 7 +---
tc/em_canid.c | 4 +-
tc/em_cmp.c | 4 +-
tc/em_ipset.c | 4 +-
tc/em_meta.c | 4 +-
tc/em_nbyte.c | 4 +-
tc/em_u32.c | 4 +-
tc/f_flow.c | 3 --
tc/f_flower.c | 3 +-
tc/f_fw.c | 6 +--
tc/f_route.c | 3 --
tc/f_rsvp.c | 6 +--
tc/f_u32.c | 12 ++----
tc/m_action.c | 26 ++++---------
tc/m_bpf.c | 5 +--
tc/m_csum.c | 4 +-
tc/m_ematch.c | 4 +-
tc/m_gact.c | 5 +--
tc/m_ife.c | 5 +--
tc/m_ipt.c | 13 ++-----
tc/m_mirred.c | 7 +---
tc/m_nat.c | 4 +-
tc/m_pedit.c | 11 ++----
tc/m_police.c | 5 +--
tc/q_atm.c | 3 +-
tc/q_cbq.c | 22 +++--------
tc/q_choke.c | 4 +-
tc/q_codel.c | 3 +-
tc/q_dsmark.c | 1 -
tc/q_fifo.c | 4 +-
tc/q_fq_codel.c | 3 +-
tc/q_hfsc.c | 13 ++-----
tc/q_htb.c | 15 +++-----
tc/q_netem.c | 16 +++-----
tc/q_red.c | 4 +-
tc/q_sfb.c | 17 ++++-----
tc/q_sfq.c | 4 +-
tc/q_tbf.c | 4 +-
tc/tc.c | 9 ++---
tc/tc_bpf.c | 58 ++++++++++------------------
tc/tc_class.c | 38 +++++++-----------
tc/tc_exec.c | 6 +--
tc/tc_filter.c | 33 ++++++----------
tc/tc_qdisc.c | 33 ++++++----------
tc/tc_stab.c | 4 +-
tc/tc_util.c | 3 +-
85 files changed, 565 insertions(+), 977 deletions(-)
--
2.8.2
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread* RE: [iproute PATCH v3 0/6] Big C99 style initializer rework
2016-06-23 17:34 Phil Sutter
@ 2016-06-24 9:17 ` David Laight
2016-06-24 11:47 ` Phil Sutter
2016-06-24 13:12 ` Nicolas Dichtel
1 sibling, 1 reply; 12+ messages in thread
From: David Laight @ 2016-06-24 9:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: 'Phil Sutter', Stephen Hemminger
Cc: Daniel Borkmann, David Ahern, Nicolas Dichtel, Julien Floret, netdev
From: Phil Sutter
> Sent: 23 June 2016 18:34
>
> This is v3 of my C99-style initializer related patch series.
...
It would be interesting to know how this affect the kernel code size?
While gcc will generate a memset() call for 'struct foo = {0}' if you
initialise some members it might generate explicit zeroing instructions
for all the other words of the structure.
I've seen gcc use memset() to zero the end of a structure, it may use
memset() for large gaps earlier in the structure.
But if you initialise a byte half way down you are very unlikely to
get a single memset() and then a write to the single location.
David
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread* Re: [iproute PATCH v3 0/6] Big C99 style initializer rework
2016-06-24 9:17 ` David Laight
@ 2016-06-24 11:47 ` Phil Sutter
0 siblings, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: Phil Sutter @ 2016-06-24 11:47 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: David Laight
Cc: Stephen Hemminger, Daniel Borkmann, David Ahern, Nicolas Dichtel,
Julien Floret, netdev
Hi,
On Fri, Jun 24, 2016 at 09:17:07AM +0000, David Laight wrote:
> From: Phil Sutter
> > Sent: 23 June 2016 18:34
> >
> > This is v3 of my C99-style initializer related patch series.
> ...
>
> It would be interesting to know how this affect the kernel code size?
>
> While gcc will generate a memset() call for 'struct foo = {0}' if you
> initialise some members it might generate explicit zeroing instructions
> for all the other words of the structure.
>
> I've seen gcc use memset() to zero the end of a structure, it may use
> memset() for large gaps earlier in the structure.
>
> But if you initialise a byte half way down you are very unlikely to
> get a single memset() and then a write to the single location.
I did a standard build ('make distclean; make') before and after this
commit in my tree. The 'ip' binary didn't change in size at all (quite
surprising), the 'tc' binary shrunk by 48 bytes.
Cheers, Phil
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
* Re: [iproute PATCH v3 0/6] Big C99 style initializer rework
2016-06-23 17:34 Phil Sutter
2016-06-24 9:17 ` David Laight
@ 2016-06-24 13:12 ` Nicolas Dichtel
1 sibling, 0 replies; 12+ messages in thread
From: Nicolas Dichtel @ 2016-06-24 13:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Phil Sutter, Stephen Hemminger
Cc: Daniel Borkmann, David Ahern, Julien Floret, netdev
Le 23/06/2016 19:34, Phil Sutter a écrit :
> This is v3 of my C99-style initializer related patch series. The changes
> since v2 are:
Compile-tested with a gcc 4.4.7.
Regards,
Nicolas
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 12+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2016-06-28 18:06 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <d6784d8bb2d84ceab6c1719e32e8fa8e@HQ1WP-EXMB11.corp.brocade.com>
2016-06-27 17:59 ` [iproute PATCH v3 0/6] Big C99 style initializer rework Stephen Hemminger
2016-06-27 18:23 ` Phil Sutter
2016-06-27 21:10 ` Stephen Hemminger
2016-06-28 17:37 ` Phil Sutter
2016-06-28 17:37 ` David Ahern
2016-06-28 17:58 ` Phil Sutter
2016-06-28 17:59 ` David Ahern
2016-06-28 18:07 ` Phil Sutter
2016-06-23 17:34 Phil Sutter
2016-06-24 9:17 ` David Laight
2016-06-24 11:47 ` Phil Sutter
2016-06-24 13:12 ` Nicolas Dichtel
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.