From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:59287) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1S7WAY-0005vn-IA for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 13 Mar 2012 14:09:59 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1S7WAE-0000GA-F1 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 13 Mar 2012 14:09:58 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:47705) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1S7WAE-0000Fr-6h for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Tue, 13 Mar 2012 14:09:38 -0400 Message-ID: <4F5F8D5A.7090604@redhat.com> Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2012 12:09:30 -0600 From: Eric Blake MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1330893156-26569-1-git-send-email-afaerber@suse.de> <1331398436-20761-1-git-send-email-afaerber@suse.de> <1331398436-20761-3-git-send-email-afaerber@suse.de> <4F5F3E07.9070706@samsung.com> <4F5F8AE3.9080302@suse.de> <4F5F8C45.9060306@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <4F5F8C45.9060306@redhat.com> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------enig47953DCDDBF0B9E19F10084F" Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH RFC v4 02/20] target-arm: Introduce QOM ARMCPUClass List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Eric Blake Cc: Peter Maydell , i.mitsyanko@samsung.com, qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Dmitry Solodkiy , Anthony Liguori , =?UTF-8?B?QW5kcmVhcyBGw6RyYmVy?= , Paul Brook This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enig47953DCDDBF0B9E19F10084F Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 03/13/2012 12:04 PM, Eric Blake wrote: > On 03/13/2012 11:58 AM, Andreas F=C3=A4rber wrote: >=20 >>>> +static void cpu_register(const ARMCPUInfo *info) >>>> +{ >>>> + TypeInfo type =3D { >>>> + .name =3D info->name, >=20 >>> >>> Are non-initialized members guaranteed to be zero here? >> >> I thought so for the C99-style struct initialization... I never ran in= to >> crashes while testing. Do we need static to be safe? >=20 > Yes, C99 guarantees in 6.7.8 p19: Apologies for my ambiguous answer. Yes, C99 guarantees that non-mentioned members are 0-initialized if you have at least one explicit initialization. Therefore, no, you don't need static to be safe= =2E --=20 Eric Blake eblake@redhat.com +1-919-301-3266 Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org --------------enig47953DCDDBF0B9E19F10084F Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Public key at http://people.redhat.com/eblake/eblake.gpg Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJPX41aAAoJEKeha0olJ0NqH6gIAIx4/Mmb9dG48leN86oHZ4x7 T2JcVK6CCR2mCWX+Y2ciSh6ibgYjLy2V0pFIFa8wKLEW0SlRuf3bWK8q1mniWYPw Ydi7usiAAxOoSFok3r8hP0eHlNUpWQfAU9HV25IfINZdJDayZBgDe0Q+qcJ4ObF2 6bwg2XE6mmeA9AAvFmiayofdsKPd1Fw/PYF+Kah+WabwLyvjeJ7AW0+Hv85SBzPD eR8vaTEnw54sbnEaAZwK3q+hdu/MBHUTMo/7TlkwLzIie2m+jyVRko18+QicY4C5 bgI5W2dLXj4d7x55b/zWW4wDwQkO474tvA7RMj3P8DYDsdfUAKOCymrIdazdlcs= =yfNU -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enig47953DCDDBF0B9E19F10084F--