Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH] drm/amdgpu: do not initialise global variables to 0 or NULL | From | Christian König <> | Date | Tue, 3 Nov 2020 09:23:51 +0100 |
| |
Am 03.11.20 um 08:53 schrieb Greg KH: > On Mon, Nov 02, 2020 at 09:48:25PM +0100, Christian König wrote: >> Am 03.11.20 um 07:53 schrieb Greg KH: >>> On Mon, Nov 02, 2020 at 09:06:21PM +0100, Christian König wrote: >>>> Am 02.11.20 um 20:43 schrieb Alex Deucher: >>>>> On Mon, Nov 2, 2020 at 1:42 PM Deepak R Varma <mh12gx2825@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> Initializing global variable to 0 or NULL is not necessary and should >>>>>> be avoided. Issue reported by checkpatch script as: >>>>>> ERROR: do not initialise globals to 0 (or NULL). >>>>> I agree that this is technically correct, but a lot of people don't >>>>> seem to know that so we get a lot of comments about this code for the >>>>> variables that are not explicitly set. Seems less confusing to >>>>> initialize them even if it not necessary. I don't have a particularly >>>>> strong opinion on it however. >>>> Agree with Alex. >>>> >>>> Especially for the module parameters we should have a explicit init value >>>> for documentation purposes, even when it is 0. >>> Why is this one tiny driver somehow special compared to the entire rest >>> of the kernel? (hint, it isn't...) >> And it certainly shouldn't :) >> >>> Please follow the normal coding style rules, there's no reason to ignore >>> them unless you like to constantly reject patches like this that get >>> sent to you. >> Yeah, that's a rather good point. >> >> Not a particular strong opinion on this either, but when something global is >> set to 0 people usually do this to emphases that it is important that it is >> zero. > Again, no, that's not what we have been doing in the kernel for the past > 20+ years. If you do not set it to anything, we all know it is > important for it to be set to 0. Otherwise we would explicitly set it > to something else. And if we don't care, then that too doesn't matter > so we let it be 0 by not initializing it, it doesn't matter. > > I think this very change is what started the whole "kernel janitor" > movement all those years ago, because it was easily proven that this > simple change saved both time and memory.
Ok, well that is even better because it is a technical argument.
You have convinced me, the patch is Reviewed-by: Christian König <christian.koenig@amd.com>.
Regards, Christian.
> > This shouldn't even be an argument we are having anymore... > > thanks, > > greg k-h
| |