Messages in this thread | | | From | "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <> | Subject | Re: [sgi-xp] Missing break or false positive? | Date | Wed, 20 Mar 2019 10:36:04 -0500 |
| |
On 3/20/19 10:23 AM, Robin Holt wrote: > I am sorry for my delayed response. I missed the earlier email. > > On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 9:37 AM Gustavo A. R. Silva > <gustavo@embeddedor.com> wrote: >> > ... >>> I'm taking a look into the following piece of code in drivers/misc/sgi-xp/xpc_uv.c: > ... >>> and I'm trying to figure out if the following warning is due to a missing break >>> at the end of the case, or if this is just a false positive and a /* fall through */ >>> annotation should be added: > > The fall-through is by design. The protocol previously had a windows > of failure where a connection > could be in the process of being established and a failure could be > detected prior to the > handling of the establishment message. I added the new open complete > message and leveraged > the fall-through to mark the connection established. >
Great. I see now.
> Please let me know if you do not intend to submit a patch for this. >
I will send a patch to add the fall-through comment and fix the following warning:
drivers/misc/sgi-xp/xpc_uv.c: In function ‘xpc_handle_activate_mq_msg_uv’: drivers/misc/sgi-xp/xpc_uv.c:573:3: warning: this statement may fall through [-Wimplicit-fallthrough=] xpc_wakeup_channel_mgr(part); ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ drivers/misc/sgi-xp/xpc_uv.c:575:2: note: here case XPC_ACTIVATE_MQ_MSG_MARK_ENGAGED_UV: ^~~~
Notice that this is part of the ongoing efforts to enable -Wimplicit-fallthrough.
Thanks, Robin. -- Gustavo
| |