On 2021/9/20 16:12, David Sterba wrote:

On Sun, Sep 19, 2021 at 11:40:39PM +0100, Russell King (Oracle) wrote:

quoted

Debian gcc 10.2.1 complains thusly:

fs/btrfs/tree-checker.c:1071:9: warning: missing braces
around initializer [-Wmissing-braces]
   struct btrfs_root_item ri = { 0 };
          ^
fs/btrfs/tree-checker.c:1071:9: warning: (near initialization for 'ri.inode') [-Wmissing-braces]

Fix it by removing the unnecessary '0' initialiser, leaving the
braces.

Fixes: 1465af12e254 ("btrfs: tree-checker: fix false alert caused by legacy btrfs root item")
Signed-off-by: Russell King (Oracle) <redacted>
---
  fs/btrfs/tree-checker.c | 2 +-
  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/fs/btrfs/tree-checker.c b/fs/btrfs/tree-checker.c
index a8b2e0d2c025..1737b62756a6 100644
--- a/fs/btrfs/tree-checker.c
+++ b/fs/btrfs/tree-checker.c

@@ -1068,7 +1068,7 @@ static int check_root_item(struct extent_buffer *leaf, struct btrfs_key *key,
  			   int slot)
  {
  	struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info = leaf->fs_info;
-	struct btrfs_root_item ri = { 0 };
+	struct btrfs_root_item ri = { };

Kees Cook does a tree wide unification to { } because there are some
oddities with partial initialization and { 0 } so this will get fixed
eventually.

Does this mean in the future only "= { }" is preferred?

It would looks a little weird to me as C89/C90 doesn't allow this.

And I guess checkpatch would also be updated to handle that?

Thanks,
Qu

But again the minimum gcc version is now 5.1 so it won't
matter for 4.9 anyway.