Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2009 17:26:09 +0000 (UTC) From: "Bjoern A. Zeeb" <bz@FreeBSD.org> To: Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.org> Cc: svn-src-head@freebsd.org, Ed Schouten <ed@80386.nl>, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, src-committers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r186751 - in head/sys: netinet6 netipsec Message-ID: <20090105172400.T45399@maildrop.int.zabbadoz.net> In-Reply-To: <alpine.BSF.2.00.0901042213530.67103@fledge.watson.org> References: <200901042153.n04LrgkD075147@svn.freebsd.org> <20090104220716.GL14235@hoeg.nl> <alpine.BSF.2.00.0901042213530.67103@fledge.watson.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 4 Jan 2009, Robert Watson wrote: > > On Sun, 4 Jan 2009, Ed Schouten wrote: > >> * Robert Watson <rwatson@FreeBSD.org> wrote: >>> Unlike with struct protosw, several instances of struct ip6protosw >>> did not use C99-style sparse structure initialization, so remove >>> NULL assignments for now-removed pr_usrreq function pointers. >> >> Maybe we should convert them to use the C99-style initialisation. This >> could prevent similar issues in the future, right? > > I think Bjoern already has a work-in-progress on this one, but yes, that > would be a good idea. I have broken it out from a larger patch; the C99 initializer is here: http://people.freebsd.org/~bz/20090105-02-c99-initializers.diff I case someone can give it a quick glance I'll commit them. /bz -- Bjoern A. Zeeb The greatest risk is not taking one.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20090105172400.T45399>