On 7/18/2025 6:47 AM, Nithyanantham Paramasivam wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 18, 2025 at 7:01 PM Ping-Ke Shih <pkshih@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Nithyanantham Paramasivam <nithyanantham.paramasivam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> On Fri, Jul 18, 2025 at 2:45 PM Ping-Ke Shih <pkshih@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> @@ -578,6 +579,8 @@ ath12k_dp_tx_htt_tx_complete_buf(struct ath12k_base *ab,
>>>>> struct ath12k *ar;
>>>>> struct sk_buff *msdu = desc_params->skb;
>>>>> s32 noise_floor;
>>>>> + struct ieee80211_tx_status status = { 0 };
>>>>
>>>> With '= {}', no matter how the struct changes, you don't need to change the
>>>> code accordingly.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Both ={} and = {0} achieve the same result, right?
>>
>> Yes.
>>
>> However, in some cases, it might cause compiler error. But I forgot the cases,
>> even I can't reproduce the error now. Sorry for the noise.
>>
> No worries at all. If you happen to recall the scenario later, I’d be
> curious to know. For now, since we have been following the same style,
> we'll continue with it.
>
{} is preferable to { 0 } since the 2nd one causes a compilation failure if
the first member of the struct is not a scalar
