Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH] rds: send: mark expected switch fall-through in rds_rm_size | From | "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <> | Date | Tue, 20 Feb 2018 12:05:26 -0600 |
| |
Hi Santosh,
On 02/20/2018 11:54 AM, Santosh Shilimkar wrote: > Hi, > > 2/19/2018 10:10 AM, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote: >> In preparation to enabling -Wimplicit-fallthrough, mark switch cases >> where we are expecting to fall through. >> >> Addresses-Coverity-ID: 1465362 ("Missing break in switch") >> Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com> >> --- >> net/rds/send.c | 2 ++ >> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) >> >> diff --git a/net/rds/send.c b/net/rds/send.c >> index 028ab59..79d158b 100644 >> --- a/net/rds/send.c >> +++ b/net/rds/send.c >> @@ -902,6 +902,8 @@ static int rds_rm_size(struct msghdr *msg, int >> num_sgs) >> case RDS_CMSG_ZCOPY_COOKIE: >> zcopy_cookie = true; >> + /* fall through */ >> + >> case RDS_CMSG_RDMA_DEST: >> case RDS_CMSG_RDMA_MAP: >> cmsg_groups |= 2; >> > So coverity greps for commet as "fall through" for > -Wimplicit-fallthrough build ? >
No. Basically, Coverity only reports cases in which a break, return or continue statement is missing.
Now, if the statements I mention above are missing and if you add the following line to your Makefile:
KBUILD_CFLAGS += $(call cc-option,-Wimplicit-fallthrough)
You will get a warning if a fall-through comment is missing.
> Adding that comments itself if fine but was curious > about it if some one makes a spell error in this > comment what happens ;-) >
In this case, Coverity would still report the same "Missing break in switch" error, but you'll get a GCC warning.
> For patch itself, > Acked-by: Santosh Shilimkar <santosh.shilimkar@oracle.com>
-- Gustavo
| |