Thread (5 messages) 5 messages, 2 authors, 6d ago

Re: [PATCH v2] mctp: serial: replace memset with zero-initialization

From: Manish Baing <hidden>
Date: 2026-06-25 15:02:13
Also in: lkml

Hi David,
Just a quick follow-up on this thread.
Please let me know how you would like me to proceed with this patch.

Thanks & Regards ,
Manish

On Sun, Jun 7, 2026 at 1:20 AM Manish Baing [off-list ref] wrote:
Hi David,

Just a quick follow-up on this thread. When you have a moment, I would
love to hear your thoughts on my previous email.
Please let me know how you would like me to proceed with this patch.

Thanks & Regards ,
 Manish

On Sun, May 31, 2026 at 3:06 PM Manish Baing [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
Hi David,

I understand that this might just be unnecessary churn for the
networking subsystem, and I am perfectly fine dropping the patch if
that is the case.

However, for my own learning, I would love to get your perspective on
this. I was carrying over a pattern from recent cleanups in the IIO
subsystem [1],
as empty brace initialization was noted as the preferred approach in
those discussions (including by Kees Cook [2]).

Is the reasoning behind that recommendation just not applicable to
netdev,or is the policy here strictly against code churn unless it
fixes a tangible bug?

Thanks for the guidance.

[1]: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20250611-iio-zero-init-stack-with-instead-of-memset-v1-0-ebb2d0a24302@baylibre.com/ (local)
[2]: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-iio/202505090942.48EBF01B@keescook/ (local)

Regards,
Manish


On Sun, May 31, 2026 at 2:42 PM David Laight
[off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
On Sat, 30 May 2026 22:46:46 +0000
Manish Baing [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
Use empty brace initialization (= {}) instead of explicit memset()
to zero-initialize stack memory to simplify the code.

No functional change.
Isn't it also entirely pointless?

-- David
quoted
Signed-off-by: Manish Baing <redacted>
---
Changes in v2:
- Fixed a compilation error caused by a duplicate variable declaration caught
  by the kernel test robot.

 drivers/net/mctp/mctp-serial.c | 3 +--
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/net/mctp/mctp-serial.c b/drivers/net/mctp/mctp-serial.c
index 26c9a33fd636..df721ca4e07b 100644
--- a/drivers/net/mctp/mctp-serial.c
+++ b/drivers/net/mctp/mctp-serial.c
@@ -536,13 +536,12 @@ struct test_chunk_tx {

 static void test_next_chunk_len(struct kunit *test)
 {
-     struct mctp_serial devx;
+     struct mctp_serial devx = { };
      struct mctp_serial *dev = &devx;
      int next;

      const struct test_chunk_tx *params = test->param_value;

-     memset(dev, 0x0, sizeof(*dev));
      memcpy(dev->txbuf, params->input, params->input_len);
      dev->txlen = params->input_len;
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help