Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2000 01:55:08 +1100 (EST) From: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au> To: Matthew Jacob <mjacob@feral.com> Cc: "Matthew N. Dodd" <mdodd@FreeBSD.org>, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/kern subr_bus.c Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0009190145470.17074-100000@besplex.bde.org> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0009180442370.97535-100000@beppo.feral.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 18 Sep 2000, Matthew Jacob wrote: > Yeah, I wondered about that too. I thought > > int foo; > > and > > int foo=0; > > were supposed to be the same. Is the kernel now forgetting to clear bss? Same for the C abstract machine, which we mostly depend on in the kernel (although the kernel is not entirely implementable in C). Of course, it is an implementation detail that the explicit initialization puts the variable in the data section instead of in the bss, at least for gcc on i386's. The bss clearing code hasn't changed for years on i386's. I can't see where the bss is cleared on alphas (alpha_init is called very early in locore.s). Bruce To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.21.0009190145470.17074-100000>