[lkml]   [2002]   [Jan]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [PATCH] Combined APM patch
    On Fri, Jan 18, 2002 at 05:43:48AM -0500, Thomas Hood wrote:
    > On Fri, 2002-01-11 at 10:40, Russell King wrote:
    > > On Fri, Jan 11, 2002 at 10:22:24AM -0500, Thomas Hood wrote:
    > > > if someone later wants to modify the code to make
    > > > this variable non-static, the comment tells that person that
    > > > the variable will need an initializer.
    > >
    > > Whether a variable is static or not doesn't change whether it ends up in
    > > the bss segment or not.
    > It does make a difference if the variable definitions are inside
    > a function; the non-static variable is on the stack and is not
    > initialized to zero.

    I should really ignore this mail, but, sigh.

    I know this. I was commenting on your code and the comment you made which,
    in the context you were applying it, wasn't correct.

    Hope this clears up the confusion.

    > I understand that every static or top-level global variable
    > is initialized to zero; but is it not useful to note when
    > the code _relies upon_ this zero-initialization?

    Of course, I'm not disputing that.

    Russell King ( The developer of ARM Linux

    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:15    [W:0.022 / U:3.984 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site