In preparation to enable -Wimplicit-fallthrough for Clang, fix a warning
by explicitly adding a break statement instead of just letting the code
fall through to the next case.
Link: https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/115
Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <[email protected]>
---
drivers/net/ethernet/mscc/ocelot_vcap.c | 1 +
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/mscc/ocelot_vcap.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/mscc/ocelot_vcap.c
index d8c778ee6f1b..8f3ed81b9a08 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/mscc/ocelot_vcap.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/mscc/ocelot_vcap.c
@@ -761,6 +761,7 @@ static void is1_entry_set(struct ocelot *ocelot, int ix,
vcap_key_bytes_set(vcap, &data, VCAP_IS1_HK_ETYPE,
etype.value, etype.mask);
}
+ break;
}
default:
break;
--
2.27.0
Hi all,
It's been more than 3 months; who can take this, please? :)
Thanks
--
Gustavo
On Fri, Nov 20, 2020 at 12:31:13PM -0600, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote:
> In preparation to enable -Wimplicit-fallthrough for Clang, fix a warning
> by explicitly adding a break statement instead of just letting the code
> fall through to the next case.
>
> Link: https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/115
> Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <[email protected]>
> ---
> drivers/net/ethernet/mscc/ocelot_vcap.c | 1 +
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/mscc/ocelot_vcap.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/mscc/ocelot_vcap.c
> index d8c778ee6f1b..8f3ed81b9a08 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/mscc/ocelot_vcap.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/mscc/ocelot_vcap.c
> @@ -761,6 +761,7 @@ static void is1_entry_set(struct ocelot *ocelot, int ix,
> vcap_key_bytes_set(vcap, &data, VCAP_IS1_HK_ETYPE,
> etype.value, etype.mask);
> }
> + break;
> }
> default:
> break;
> --
> 2.27.0
>
Hi Gustavo,
On Thu, Mar 04, 2021 at 04:53:18PM -0600, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> It's been more than 3 months; who can take this, please? :)
>
> Thanks
> --
> Gustavo
>
> On Fri, Nov 20, 2020 at 12:31:13PM -0600, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote:
> > In preparation to enable -Wimplicit-fallthrough for Clang, fix a warning
> > by explicitly adding a break statement instead of just letting the code
> > fall through to the next case.
> >
> > Link: https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/115
> > Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <[email protected]>
> > ---
You'd obviously need to resend. But when you do please add my:
Reviewed-by: Vladimir Oltean <[email protected]>
And by the way, I think the netdev maintainers might want to take the
patches on network drivers to avoid conflicts, but on the other hand
they might not be too keen on cherry-picking bits and pieces of your 141
patch series. Would you mind creating a bundle of patches only for
netdev? I see there's definitely more than just one patch, they would
certainly get in a lot quicker that way.
Hi Vladimir,
On 3/4/21 17:01, Vladimir Oltean wrote:
> Hi Gustavo,
>
> On Thu, Mar 04, 2021 at 04:53:18PM -0600, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> It's been more than 3 months; who can take this, please? :)
>>
>> Thanks
>> --
>> Gustavo
>>
>> On Fri, Nov 20, 2020 at 12:31:13PM -0600, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote:
>>> In preparation to enable -Wimplicit-fallthrough for Clang, fix a warning
>>> by explicitly adding a break statement instead of just letting the code
>>> fall through to the next case.
>>>
>>> Link: https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/115
>>> Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <[email protected]>
>>> ---
>
> You'd obviously need to resend. But when you do please add my:
>
> Reviewed-by: Vladimir Oltean <[email protected]>
>
> And by the way, I think the netdev maintainers might want to take the
> patches on network drivers to avoid conflicts, but on the other hand
> they might not be too keen on cherry-picking bits and pieces of your 141
> patch series. Would you mind creating a bundle of patches only for
> netdev? I see there's definitely more than just one patch, they would
> certainly get in a lot quicker that way.
Thanks for your feedback. I already sent those patches again. I hope they
are applied this time. :)
--
Gustavo