lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2018]   [Aug]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
/
Date
From
Subject[PATCH net-next] net: dp83640: Mark expected switch fall-throughs
In preparation to enabling -Wimplicit-fallthrough, mark switch cases
where we are expecting to fall through.

Notice that in this particular case, I replaced the code comment at the
top of the switch statement with a proper "fall through" annotation for
each case, which is what GCC is expecting to find.

Addresses-Coverity-ID: 1056542 ("Missing break in switch")
Addresses-Coverity-ID: 1339579 ("Missing break in switch")
Addresses-Coverity-ID: 1369526 ("Missing break in switch")
Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavo@embeddedor.com>
---
drivers/net/phy/dp83640.c | 5 ++++-
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/net/phy/dp83640.c b/drivers/net/phy/dp83640.c
index 79e9b10..29aa8d7 100644
--- a/drivers/net/phy/dp83640.c
+++ b/drivers/net/phy/dp83640.c
@@ -757,13 +757,16 @@ static int decode_evnt(struct dp83640_private *dp83640,

phy_txts = data;

- switch (words) { /* fall through in every case */
+ switch (words) {
case 3:
dp83640->edata.sec_hi = phy_txts->sec_hi;
+ /* fall through */
case 2:
dp83640->edata.sec_lo = phy_txts->sec_lo;
+ /* fall through */
case 1:
dp83640->edata.ns_hi = phy_txts->ns_hi;
+ /* fall through */
case 0:
dp83640->edata.ns_lo = phy_txts->ns_lo;
}
--
2.7.4
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2018-08-09 17:10    [W:0.048 / U:0.416 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site