On 08/09/2016 11:25 AM, Andrea Bolognani wrote:
On Tue, 2016-08-09 at 11:19 +0200, Martin Kletzander wrote:
for (i = 0; i < nAddrNodes; i++) { - virPCIDeviceAddress addr = { 0, 0, 0, 0, 0 }; + virPCIDeviceAddress addr = { 0, 0, 0, 0, false };
Honestly, I have no idea what preferences we have for such initializations, but I for one prefer initialization to '{0}' which guarantees everything to be zeroed anyway. And will be readable the same way even when we change the structure. Would that work for you as well?
I think it should either be 0 (as the structure member is defined as int) or VIR_TRISTATE_SWITCH_ABSENT (as it is used as virTristateSwitch, according to the comment and other bits of code). false definitely seems out of place.
-- Andrea Bolognani / Red Hat / Virtualization
-- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
Actually this fix was about aligning three code occurrences. These three initialisations can be found here: qemu/qemu_domain_address.c 1099: virPCIDeviceAddress addr = { 0, 0, 0, 0, false }; conf/node_device_conf.c 1166: virPCIDeviceAddress addr = { 0, 0, 0, 0, 0 }; conf/domain_addr.c 572: virPCIDeviceAddress a = { 0, 0, 0, 0, false }; Setting the VIR_TRISTATE_SWITCH_ABSENT make sense from the data type point of view. Looking at it from the code readability point of view you would have to know that the default of the multifunction is Off and with that in mind it made more sense setting it to false. -- Mit freundlichen Grüßen/Kind regards Boris Fiuczynski IBM Deutschland Research & Development GmbH Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats: Martina Köderitz Geschäftsführung: Dirk Wittkopp Sitz der Gesellschaft: Böblingen Registergericht: Amtsgericht Stuttgart, HRB 243294