Re: [PATCH] vmscan: initialize sc->nr_reclaimed properly take2

[Johannes Weiner]

On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 02:06:37PM -0800, Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Tue, 10 Feb 2009 21:58:04 +0900 (JST)
> KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> > --- a/mm/vmscan.c
> > +++ b/mm/vmscan.c
> > @@ -1665,6 +1665,7 @@ unsigned long try_to_free_pages(struct z
> >  								gfp_t gfp_mask)
> >  {
> >  	struct scan_control sc = {
> > +		.nr_reclaimed = 0,
> >  		.gfp_mask = gfp_mask,
> >  		.may_writepage = !laptop_mode,
> >  		.swap_cluster_max = SWAP_CLUSTER_MAX,
> > @@ -1686,6 +1687,7 @@ unsigned long try_to_free_mem_cgroup_pag
> >  					   unsigned int swappiness)
> >  {
> >  	struct scan_control sc = {
> > +		.nr_reclaimed = 0,
> >  		.may_writepage = !laptop_mode,
> >  		.may_swap = 1,
> >  		.swap_cluster_max = SWAP_CLUSTER_MAX,
> > @@ -2245,6 +2247,7 @@ static int __zone_reclaim(struct zone *z
> >  	struct reclaim_state reclaim_state;
> >  	int priority;
> >  	struct scan_control sc = {
> > +		.nr_reclaimed = 0,
> >  		.may_writepage = !!(zone_reclaim_mode & RECLAIM_WRITE),
> >  		.may_swap = !!(zone_reclaim_mode & RECLAIM_SWAP),
> >  		.swap_cluster_max = max_t(unsigned long, nr_pages,
> 
> Confused.  The compiler already initialises any unmentioned fields to zero,
> so this patch has no effect.

Oh, nice, I was actually testing the wrong thing!

	struct foo foo;

wouldn't do that.  But

	struct foo foo = { .a = 5 };

actually would initialize foo.b = 0.

Sorry.  Please ignore this patch and the other one regarding the
explicit initialization of sc.order.  :(

	Hannes
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/