From owner-freebsd-bugs  Sun May 18 20:35:49 1997
Return-Path: <owner-bugs>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id UAA00146
          for bugs-outgoing; Sun, 18 May 1997 20:35:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from godzilla.zeta.org.au (godzilla.zeta.org.au [203.2.228.19])
          by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id UAA00141
          for <freebsd-bugs@hub.freebsd.org>; Sun, 18 May 1997 20:35:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (from bde@localhost) by godzilla.zeta.org.au (8.8.5/8.6.9) id NAA29656; Mon, 19 May 1997 13:29:10 +1000
Date: Mon, 19 May 1997 13:29:10 +1000
From: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au>
Message-Id: <199705190329.NAA29656@godzilla.zeta.org.au>
To: dg@root.com, gibbs@plutotech.com
Subject: Re: kern/3618: getsockname and getpeername may cause trap 12
Cc: freebsd-bugs@hub.freebsd.org, wollman@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu
Sender: owner-bugs@FreeBSD.ORG
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

>>I think that the splnet() and perhaps the other initializers should be
>>broken appart from the declarations since, as I recall, he compiler can
>>re-order the initializations if it doesn't see any interdependancies.
>>It would also make it clearer exactly which actions need splnet protection.

The extern function call and visible side effects in the inline function
call should prevent reordering.  It's just unclear.

>   I agree. It's the one thing that caught my eye immediately when I looked at
>the diff.

Besides, style(9) explicitly says not to obfuscate code by initializing
variables in declarations.  This obfuscation should only be used
thoughfully. :-).

Bruce