Re: [RFC][PATCH v2 4/8] Replace page_referenced() with wipe_page_reference()

[KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@jp.fujitsu.com>]

> KOSAKI Motohiro wrote:
> > @@ -578,7 +577,9 @@ static unsigned long shrink_page_list(struct list_head *page_list,
> >
> > +		struct page_reference_context refctx = {
> > +			.is_page_locked = 1,
> >
> >   *
> > @@ -1289,7 +1291,6 @@ static void shrink_active_list(unsigned long nr_pages, struct zone *zone,
> >
> > +		struct page_reference_context refctx = {
> > +			.is_page_locked = 0,
> > +		};
> > +
> >   
> are these whole structs properly initialized on the kernel stack?

Yes. C spec says

3.5.7 Initialization

Syntax

          initializer:
                  assignment-expression
                  {  initializer-list } 
                  {  initializer-list , }

          initializer-list:
                  initializer
                  initializer-list ,  initializer
(snip)

   If there are fewer initializers in a list than there are members of
an aggregate, the remainder of the aggregate shall be initialized
implicitly the same as objects that have static storage duration.

Referenced to
  Draft ANSI C Standard (ANSI X3J11/88-090) (May 13, 1988) http://flash-gordon.me.uk/ansi.c.txt


Probably, google "{0}" help your understand to initializer in C.




--
To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in
the body to majordomo@kvack.org.  For more info on Linux MM,
see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ .
Don't email: <a href=mailto:"dont@kvack.org"> email@kvack.org </a>