Received: by 2002:ac0:946b:0:0:0:0:0 with SMTP id j40csp190832imj; Thu, 14 Feb 2019 18:19:49 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Smtp-Source: AHgI3Ibhm0mzPM9H8fI8mWut+kUdGmc6kdi8fXNiQyrcDHAeYc4e6S6BWCYsz4yvgUYYI7mwu5MP X-Received: by 2002:a62:2e46:: with SMTP id u67mr7256128pfu.3.1550197189040; Thu, 14 Feb 2019 18:19:49 -0800 (PST) ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; t=1550197189; cv=none; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; b=SjaIC9+dCTU6XELgkVUTra6Y84M2+xfrwcC51MA1nLU0KbbYQ6dHOSfT1rcz6xZplP HDY+WrWl9EQ1Bg1XIA3cOb6Z0GHW5w8xA5kqTXUPlbOdRDfBPQUK+/EtA5uBkWU532vo L/TKIoFS6RK+B7jNo/Z5O9k300ZTPt0s/e7ft/rG7CuRdhGmfsAzDh3XPemdKTjFslJv Kk9Xd9YkmP0wqWqNkYo8IxNw87eT2BlTsxzdXDsuJCvC0qfDFuBWcJ03Itio6oGjmMyE 5RM6kLcPzKO8JY+tSvYGHag5EbAUX5PhgdvCVNFWPyxdm3nFHzBpfljy5dj0NF/YJQQv 36dg== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=arc-20160816; h=list-id:precedence:sender:user-agent:in-reply-to :content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:mime-version :references:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date; bh=AHtjHVaikUc9x9wa/Y+WplQt1ry3rAhmwAWb9V7bH3s=; b=eizmF6asA9i0H6FPTrJDWBAG5Vx0FlvnsnfiLuwoAJVKCg23QHLsBOfr0Re9Rq5APr 7CLR30OFlKGcVqJZnC088ai1Py0auX2REVVrkVZDa/BxKxIDygBjJPxA/PBveqQ9r8hm voN2vBKhxuZ2JUJy5iC7x6wIj2O/4vatKXbxjEaPATv19bh1u60uT5mCIEyR1DXIS/m8 cSdDo3pUgpJh+qLEZpWvho7F8qpLOhFAyl8CghzaNhMEJBQ0ThqdQ88zlKLwAfH6G22H 1+40bdmyQPSqVAOMqd0SQ3iBJxTqROPdq+pbTnEPUcJjn1xHSp8SjTth/aJRkHngzyvq bVUA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org. [209.132.180.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTP id h3si4073886pgc.354.2019.02.14.18.19.33; Thu, 14 Feb 2019 18:19:49 -0800 (PST) Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67; Authentication-Results: mx.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2406417AbfBNWYk (ORCPT + 99 others); Thu, 14 Feb 2019 17:24:40 -0500 Received: from mslow2.mail.gandi.net ([217.70.178.242]:55550 "EHLO mslow2.mail.gandi.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2440524AbfBNWYZ (ORCPT ); Thu, 14 Feb 2019 17:24:25 -0500 Received: from relay12.mail.gandi.net (unknown [217.70.178.232]) by mslow2.mail.gandi.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id D0D063A4B86; Thu, 14 Feb 2019 23:17:06 +0100 (CET) Received: from localhost (lfbn-lyo-1-149-219.w86-202.abo.wanadoo.fr [86.202.231.219]) (Authenticated sender: alexandre.belloni@bootlin.com) by relay12.mail.gandi.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C7A34200009; Thu, 14 Feb 2019 22:17:03 +0000 (UTC) Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2019 23:17:03 +0100 From: Alexandre Belloni To: "Gustavo A. R. Silva" Cc: Nicolas.Ferre@microchip.com, wg@grandegger.com, mkl@pengutronix.de, davem@davemloft.net, Ludovic.Desroches@microchip.com, linux-can@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] can: mark expected switch fall-throughs Message-ID: <20190214221703.GQ10129@piout.net> References: <20190129180612.GA28650@embeddedor> <432a9399-95f4-e988-5cd2-93340f155fa1@microchip.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi, On 14/02/2019 15:37:26-0600, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote: > > > On 1/30/19 2:11 AM, Nicolas.Ferre@microchip.com wrote: > > On 29/01/2019 at 19:06, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote: > >> In preparation to enabling -Wimplicit-fallthrough, mark switch cases > >> where we are expecting to fall through. > >> > >> This patch fixes the following warnings: > >> > >> drivers/net/can/peak_canfd/peak_pciefd_main.c:668:3: warning: this statement may fall through [-Wimplicit-fallthrough=] > >> drivers/net/can/spi/mcp251x.c:875:7: warning: this statement may fall through [-Wimplicit-fallthrough=] > >> drivers/net/can/usb/peak_usb/pcan_usb.c:422:6: warning: this statement may fall through [-Wimplicit-fallthrough=] > >> drivers/net/can/at91_can.c:895:6: warning: this statement may fall through [-Wimplicit-fallthrough=] > >> drivers/net/can/at91_can.c:953:15: warning: this statement may fall through [-Wimplicit-fallthrough=] > >> drivers/net/can/usb/peak_usb/pcan_usb.c: In function ‘pcan_usb_decode_error’: > >> drivers/net/can/usb/peak_usb/pcan_usb.c:422:6: warning: this statement may fall through [-Wimplicit-fallthrough=] > >> if (n & PCAN_USB_ERROR_BUS_LIGHT) { > >> ^ > >> drivers/net/can/usb/peak_usb/pcan_usb.c:428:2: note: here > >> case CAN_STATE_ERROR_WARNING: > >> ^~~~ > >> > >> Warning level 3 was used: -Wimplicit-fallthrough=3 > >> > >> This patch is part of the ongoing efforts to enabling > >> -Wimplicit-fallthrough. > >> > >> Notice that in some cases spelling mistakes were fixed. > >> In other cases, the /* fall through */ comment is placed > >> at the bottom of the case statement, which is what GCC > >> is expecting to find. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva > >> --- > >> drivers/net/can/at91_can.c | 6 ++++-- > > > > For this one: > > Acked-by: Nicolas Ferre > > > > Thanks, Nicolas. > I though I had a déjà vu but you actually sent the at91 part twice. > Dave: > > I wonder if you can take this patch. > > Thanks > -- > Gustavo > > >> drivers/net/can/peak_canfd/peak_pciefd_main.c | 2 +- > >> drivers/net/can/spi/mcp251x.c | 3 ++- > >> drivers/net/can/usb/peak_usb/pcan_usb.c | 2 +- > >> 4 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > >> > >> diff --git a/drivers/net/can/at91_can.c b/drivers/net/can/at91_can.c > >> index d98c69045b17..1718c20f9c99 100644 > >> --- a/drivers/net/can/at91_can.c > >> +++ b/drivers/net/can/at91_can.c > >> @@ -902,7 +902,8 @@ static void at91_irq_err_state(struct net_device *dev, > >> CAN_ERR_CRTL_TX_WARNING : > >> CAN_ERR_CRTL_RX_WARNING; > >> } > >> - case CAN_STATE_ERROR_WARNING: /* fallthrough */ > >> + /* fall through */ > >> + case CAN_STATE_ERROR_WARNING: > >> /* > >> * from: ERROR_ACTIVE, ERROR_WARNING > >> * to : ERROR_PASSIVE, BUS_OFF > >> @@ -951,7 +952,8 @@ static void at91_irq_err_state(struct net_device *dev, > >> netdev_dbg(dev, "Error Active\n"); > >> cf->can_id |= CAN_ERR_PROT; > >> cf->data[2] = CAN_ERR_PROT_ACTIVE; > >> - case CAN_STATE_ERROR_WARNING: /* fallthrough */ Seriously, for that one, you should fix the compiler. The fall through is not implicit, it is actually quite explicit and the warning is simply wrong. Also, the gcc documentation says that -Wimplicit-fallthrough=3 recognizes /* fallthrough */ as a proper fall through comment (and I tested with gcc 8.2). The matching regex is [ \t.!]*([Ee]lse,? |[Ii]ntentional(ly)? )? fall(s | |-)?thr(ough|u)[ \t.!]*(-[^\n\r]*)? -- Alexandre Belloni, Bootlin Embedded Linux and Kernel engineering https://bootlin.com