Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-wireless-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Wed, 10 Mar 2021 11:14:56 -0800
From:   Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
To:     Kalle Valo <kvalo@codeaurora.org>
Cc:     "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavoars@kernel.org>,
        Jes Sorensen <Jes.Sorensen@gmail.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
        linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND][next] rtl8xxxu: Fix fall-through warnings for
 Clang
Message-ID: <202103101107.BE8B6AF2@keescook>
References: <20210305094850.GA141221@embeddedor>
 <871rct67n2.fsf@codeaurora.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <871rct67n2.fsf@codeaurora.org>
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Mar 05, 2021 at 03:40:33PM +0200, Kalle Valo wrote:
> "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <gustavoars@kernel.org> writes:
> 
> > In preparation to enable -Wimplicit-fallthrough for Clang, fix
> > multiple warnings by replacing /* fall through */ comments with
> > the new pseudo-keyword macro fallthrough; instead of letting the
> > code fall through to the next case.
> >
> > Notice that Clang doesn't recognize /* fall through */ comments as
> > implicit fall-through markings.
> >
> > Link: https://github.com/KSPP/linux/issues/115
> > Signed-off-by: Gustavo A. R. Silva <gustavoars@kernel.org>
> 
> It's not cool that you ignore the comments you got in [1], then after a
> while mark the patch as "RESEND" and not even include a changelog why it
> was resent.
> 
> [1] https://patchwork.kernel.org/project/linux-wireless/patch/d522f387b2d0dde774785c7169c1f25aa529989d.1605896060.git.gustavoars@kernel.org/

Hm, this conversation looks like a miscommunication, mainly? I see
Gustavo, as requested by many others[1], replacing the fallthrough
comments with the "fallthrough" statement. (This is more than just a
"Clang doesn't parse comments" issue.)

This could be a tree-wide patch and not bother you, but Greg KH has
generally advised us to send these changes broken out. Anyway, this
change still needs to land, so what would be the preferred path? I think
Gustavo could just carry it for Linus to merge without bothering you if
that'd be preferred?

-Kees

[1] https://git.kernel.org/linus/294f69e662d1570703e9b56e95be37a9fd3afba5

-- 
Kees Cook