Re: [PATCH] staging: lustre: ldlm: use designated initializers

On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 11:07 AM, Dan Carpenter wrote: > On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 02:57:17PM +, Hammond, John wrote: >> "{ NULL }" is valid ISO C, but unfortunately "{}" is not. > > In the kernel we don't care. We use lots of GCC extensions. We depend on the

Re: [PATCH] staging: lustre: ldlm: use designated initializers

On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 11:07 AM, Dan Carpenter wrote: > On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 02:57:17PM +, Hammond, John wrote: >> "{ NULL }" is valid ISO C, but unfortunately "{}" is not. > > In the kernel we don't care. We use lots of GCC extensions. We depend on the compiler to do "incomplete

Re: [PATCH] staging: lustre: ldlm: use designated initializers

On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 02:57:17PM +, Hammond, John wrote: > "{ NULL }" is valid ISO C, but unfortunately "{}" is not. In the kernel we don't care. We use lots of GCC extensions. regards, dan carpenter

Re: [PATCH] staging: lustre: ldlm: use designated initializers

On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 02:57:17PM +, Hammond, John wrote: > "{ NULL }" is valid ISO C, but unfortunately "{}" is not. In the kernel we don't care. We use lots of GCC extensions. regards, dan carpenter

Re: [PATCH] staging: lustre: ldlm: use designated initializers

On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 08:47:51AM -0800, Bruce Korb wrote: > > > > "{ NULL }" is valid ISO C, but unfortunately "{}" is not. > > Just make the thing "static const" and don't use an initializer. That also works, of course. regards, dan carpenter

Re: [PATCH] staging: lustre: ldlm: use designated initializers

On Tue, Dec 20, 2016 at 08:47:51AM -0800, Bruce Korb wrote: > > > > "{ NULL }" is valid ISO C, but unfortunately "{}" is not. > > Just make the thing "static const" and don't use an initializer. That also works, of course. regards, dan carpenter

Re: [PATCH] staging: lustre: ldlm: use designated initializers

> > "{ NULL }" is valid ISO C, but unfortunately "{}" is not. Just make the thing "static const" and don't use an initializer.

Re: [PATCH] staging: lustre: ldlm: use designated initializers

> > "{ NULL }" is valid ISO C, but unfortunately "{}" is not. Just make the thing "static const" and don't use an initializer.

RE: [PATCH] staging: lustre: ldlm: use designated initializers

> On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 08:47:50AM -0800, Bruce Korb wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 8:22 AM, James Simmons > > >> --- a/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ldlm/ldlm_flock.c > > >> +++ b/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ldlm/ldlm_flock.c > > >> @@ -143,7 +143,7 @@ static int

RE: [PATCH] staging: lustre: ldlm: use designated initializers

> On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 08:47:50AM -0800, Bruce Korb wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 8:22 AM, James Simmons > > >> --- a/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ldlm/ldlm_flock.c > > >> +++ b/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ldlm/ldlm_flock.c > > >> @@ -143,7 +143,7 @@ static int

Re: [PATCH] staging: lustre: ldlm: use designated initializers

On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 04:22:58PM +, James Simmons wrote: > > > Prepare to mark sensitive kernel structures for randomization by making > > sure they're using designated initializers. These were identified during > > allyesconfig builds of x86, arm, and arm64, with most initializer fixes > >

Re: [PATCH] staging: lustre: ldlm: use designated initializers

On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 04:22:58PM +, James Simmons wrote: > > > Prepare to mark sensitive kernel structures for randomization by making > > sure they're using designated initializers. These were identified during > > allyesconfig builds of x86, arm, and arm64, with most initializer fixes > >

Re: [PATCH] staging: lustre: ldlm: use designated initializers

On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 08:47:50AM -0800, Bruce Korb wrote: > On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 8:22 AM, James Simmons > >> --- a/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ldlm/ldlm_flock.c > >> +++ b/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ldlm/ldlm_flock.c > >> @@ -143,7 +143,7 @@ static int ldlm_process_flock_lock(struct

Re: [PATCH] staging: lustre: ldlm: use designated initializers

On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 08:47:50AM -0800, Bruce Korb wrote: > On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 8:22 AM, James Simmons > >> --- a/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ldlm/ldlm_flock.c > >> +++ b/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ldlm/ldlm_flock.c > >> @@ -143,7 +143,7 @@ static int ldlm_process_flock_lock(struct

Re: [PATCH] staging: lustre: ldlm: use designated initializers

> On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 8:22 AM, James Simmons > >> --- a/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ldlm/ldlm_flock.c > >> +++ b/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ldlm/ldlm_flock.c > >> @@ -143,7 +143,7 @@ static int ldlm_process_flock_lock(struct ldlm_lock > >> *req, __u64 *flags, > >> int added =

Re: [PATCH] staging: lustre: ldlm: use designated initializers

> On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 8:22 AM, James Simmons > >> --- a/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ldlm/ldlm_flock.c > >> +++ b/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ldlm/ldlm_flock.c > >> @@ -143,7 +143,7 @@ static int ldlm_process_flock_lock(struct ldlm_lock > >> *req, __u64 *flags, > >> int added =

Re: [lustre-devel] [PATCH] staging: lustre: ldlm: use designated initializers

g> > Sent: Monday, December 19, 2016 10:22:58 AM > To: Kees Cook > Cc: de...@driverdev.osuosl.org; Greg Kroah-Hartman; > linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; Oleg Drokin; Vitaly > Fertman; Bruce Korb; Emoly Liu; lustre-de...@lists.lustre.org > Subject: Re: [lustre-devel] [PATCH] stagi

Re: [lustre-devel] [PATCH] staging: lustre: ldlm: use designated initializers

ook > Cc: de...@driverdev.osuosl.org; Greg Kroah-Hartman; > linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; Oleg Drokin; Vitaly > Fertman; Bruce Korb; Emoly Liu; lustre-de...@lists.lustre.org > Subject: Re: [lustre-devel] [PATCH] staging: lustre: ldlm: use designated > initializers   > > > Prep

Re: [PATCH] staging: lustre: ldlm: use designated initializers

On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 8:22 AM, James Simmons >> --- a/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ldlm/ldlm_flock.c >> +++ b/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ldlm/ldlm_flock.c >> @@ -143,7 +143,7 @@ static int ldlm_process_flock_lock(struct ldlm_lock >> *req, __u64 *flags, >> int added = (mode == LCK_NL);

Re: [PATCH] staging: lustre: ldlm: use designated initializers

On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 8:22 AM, James Simmons >> --- a/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ldlm/ldlm_flock.c >> +++ b/drivers/staging/lustre/lustre/ldlm/ldlm_flock.c >> @@ -143,7 +143,7 @@ static int ldlm_process_flock_lock(struct ldlm_lock >> *req, __u64 *flags, >> int added = (mode == LCK_NL);

Re: [PATCH] staging: lustre: ldlm: use designated initializers

> Prepare to mark sensitive kernel structures for randomization by making > sure they're using designated initializers. These were identified during > allyesconfig builds of x86, arm, and arm64, with most initializer fixes > extracted from grsecurity. > > Signed-off-by: Kees Cook

Re: [PATCH] staging: lustre: ldlm: use designated initializers

> Prepare to mark sensitive kernel structures for randomization by making > sure they're using designated initializers. These were identified during > allyesconfig builds of x86, arm, and arm64, with most initializer fixes > extracted from grsecurity. > > Signed-off-by: Kees Cook > --- >

[PATCH] staging: lustre: ldlm: use designated initializers

Prepare to mark sensitive kernel structures for randomization by making sure they're using designated initializers. These were identified during allyesconfig builds of x86, arm, and arm64, with most initializer fixes extracted from grsecurity. Signed-off-by: Kees Cook ---

[PATCH] staging: lustre: ldlm: use designated initializers

Prepare to mark sensitive kernel structures for randomization by making sure they're using designated initializers. These were identified during allyesconfig builds of x86, arm, and arm64, with most initializer fixes extracted from grsecurity. Signed-off-by: Kees Cook ---