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;
Date:   Fri, 03 Nov 2017 10:57:45 -0500
Message-ID: <20171103105745.Horde.MKbMOaJQkoG4PaLLOWR8qLo@gator4166.hostgator.com>
From:   "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <garsilva@embeddedor.com>
To:     Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>
Cc:     Wim Van Sebroeck <wim@iguana.be>, linux-watchdog@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] watchdog: pcwd_pci: mark expected switch fall-through
References: <20171103144915.GA6243@embeddedor.com>
 <20171103150423.GA10138@infomag.iguana.be>
 <20171103155426.GA21990@roeck-us.net>
In-Reply-To: <20171103155426.GA21990@roeck-us.net>
User-Agent: Horde Application Framework 5
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed; DelSp=Yes
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Disposition: inline
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk


Quoting Guenter Roeck <linux@roeck-us.net>:

> On Fri, Nov 03, 2017 at 04:04:23PM +0100, Wim Van Sebroeck wrote:
>> Hi Gustavo,
>>
>> > In preparation to enabling -Wimplicit-fallthrough, mark switch cases
>> > where we are expecting to fall through.
>> >
>> > Notice that in this particular case I replaced "Fall" with a proper
>> > "fall through" comment, which is what GCC is expecting to find.
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <garsilva@embeddedor.com>
>> > ---
>> >  drivers/watchdog/pcwd_pci.c | 2 +-
>> >  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>> >
>> > diff --git a/drivers/watchdog/pcwd_pci.c b/drivers/watchdog/pcwd_pci.c
>> > index c0d07ee..c882252 100644
>> > --- a/drivers/watchdog/pcwd_pci.c
>> > +++ b/drivers/watchdog/pcwd_pci.c
>> > @@ -545,7 +545,7 @@ static long pcipcwd_ioctl(struct file *file,  
>> unsigned int cmd,
>> >  			return -EINVAL;
>> >
>> >  		pcipcwd_keepalive();
>> > -		/* Fall */
>> > +		/* fall through */
>> >  	}
>> >
>> >  	case WDIOC_GETTIMEOUT:
>> > --
>> > 2.7.4
>> >
>>
>> Shouldn't the /* fall through */ come after the } ?
>>
> Good question. This is an unconditional code block needed to declare
> a local variable within the case statement. What is correct in that
> situation ?
>

I think it is correct to place the comment outside the code block.

I'll send a patch shortly.

Thanks
--
Gustavo A. R. Silva


From 1583062315665798527@xxx Fri Nov 03 16:17:51 +0000 2017
X-GM-THRID: 1583056957567251846
X-Gmail-Labels: Inbox,Category Forums,HistoricalUnread